Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rex Lassalle


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep based on sources added. RL0919 (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Rex Lassalle

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP with only references to his own publications Rathfelder (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Anthony's Historical Dictionary of Trinidad and Tobago is the source I used to create the article, so no, Lasalle's work isn't the only ref used, just the only inline ref. Guettarda (talk) 19:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved Anthony ref inline. Still needs cleanup. Guettarda (talk) 19:42, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * OK, so there's an entry in a national-level historical dictionary published by an imprint of Rowman & Littlefield, a notable publisher of scholarly works. There's discussion of Lassalle's role as a leader of the mutiny and the lead negotiator with the government in Meighoo's work (which is a scholarly work published by publisher of scholarly works) and in Brian Meeks' book, another work by an academic published by an academic publisher. There's a profile published in the leading national newspaper published 30 years after the mutiny, showing enduring national interest in Lassalle even though he has left the sphere of "revolutionary" entirely. And that's despite the fact that my access to sources is limited - I don't have access to a library with significant West Indian holdings, nor have I had time to spend much time on the topic. Guettarda (talk) 06:36, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I'n not seeing "an entry" for this person in a historical dictionary, I'm seeing two mentions of them, in two discussions of the same event. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:05, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * - I'm not sure what you mean. There's an entry in Anthony's historical dictionary that begins: "LASSALLE, Reginald Andrew [Rex] (1945-)". The entry is between LARA, Brian Charles and LAW. It isn't the longest entry in the book, but it's longer than many, including Brian Lara's entry. Guettarda (talk) 18:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It's out of my page preview range but I'll take your word for it. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Caribbean-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 20:38, 5 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - Doesn't meet WP:SOLDIER and imho falls far short of WP:GNG. The cited refs about Dr. Major Bertrand DeJarnette and The Mandarin Oriental Spa don't mention Lassalle. Almost all of the other refs are Lassalle's own work.-- Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 20:45, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * - What's the problem with Anthony's Historical Dictionary of Trinidad and Tobago? It's been a while since I created the article, but I believe Lassalle had his own entry. Guettarda (talk) 00:45, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't know if there's anything wrong with Anthony, but your subject was a company grade officer and is presumed non-notable. If the mutiny had succeeded, that would be a different story.-- Georgia Army Vet Contribs</i> <b style="color: blue;">Talk</b> 01:59, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * - but isn't the subject of an entry in a national-level historical dictionary presumed to be notable? His military rank is totally incidental when experts have deemed someone important enough to warrant their own entry in a work like this. Guettarda (talk) 06:43, 7 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment I have edited the article to break it up into lead sentence, early life and career. The last three paragraphs are not relevant to his notability. It needs more information about his role in the mutiny, and in particular, if there was significant coverage of his role and him at the time or in later analyses, that needs to be included if he is to be shown to be notable. That is probably the only reason he would be considered notable for Wikipedia purposes, unless his books have had multiple reviews in RS. RebeccaGreen (talk) 21:00, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - subject is mentioned solely within the context of the mutiny by reliable sources. Any salvageable content about their role in the mutiny can be merged to Black Power Revolution. -Indy beetle (talk) 06:07, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - We have an entry in the one of the Rowman & Littlefield Historical Dictionary series and some significant coverage in a national newspaper, so I think GNG is sufficed. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:00, 7 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Much improved. I think we should keep it. There will almost certainly be more sources in print. Rathfelder (talk) 08:17, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The link in reference #9 (supposedly titled "Holistic practitioner Rex Lassalle promotes lifestyle changes: No quick fix to good health") doesn't match the actual reference. Instead it goes to an article, "Lassalle back home to make mind-body link", that cites Wikipedia, which is a violation of WP:CIRC. -Indy beetle (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Oops. Well that's embarrassing! I had both windows open (the Kong Soo article and the Gordon "article") and pasted the wrong URL. I agree, using the Gordon article as a source would we classic citogenesis. Guettarda (talk) 18:24, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete - One of the "national newspaper" references mentioned above, from the Guardian Trinidad, is a first-person account written by Raffique Shah, Lassalle's partner in their attempted mutiny (titled "Mutiny without the bounty"). Thus, that article is not considered a reliable source and should be moved to the External links section. Based on a lack of reliable third-party sources - this article is mostly hanging on content from the subject's own books - as well as the fact that the mutiny was unsuccessful and significant reliable sources cannot be found, this fails WP:GNG. It also does not pass WP:BASIC. It is instead an example of WP:BIO1E, and the one event is lacking significant coverage to warrant a Wikipedia article about the subject. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 02:48, 8 January 2019 (UTC) Changing !vote to Keep. Agree that with improved sources, the article now shows notability. Passes WP:GNG. AuthorAuthor (talk) 22:25, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The Guardian source I was referring to was not Shah's account of the mutiny; it was the Kong Soo article about Lassalle written decades later, showing that he's still seen as a noteworthy figure after all this time. And no, the article isn't mostly hanging on content from the subject's own books - it's based on Anthony's historical dictionary and scholarly books by two academics - Meighoo, a political scientist and Meeks, a social scientist. The only fact in the article based on Lassalle's own books are two sentences about his birth and early education. Guettarda (talk) 04:59, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * The Trinidad and Tobago Guardian is a reputable source. If they run an article by his associate that doesnt stop it being a reputable source, any more than the Washington Post relying on an interview with one of Trump's associates.  Its the fact that they choose to run the story that demonstrates notability. Rathfelder (talk) 09:46, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Black Power Revolution His participation in the failed revolution is all he's really notable for. Reporting in the T&T paper about his tour promoting his book (along with claims like he can tell a lot about people just by knowing their birthday) doesn't seem like much editorial oversight. His name is only mentioned twice in Anthony's Historical Dictionary (once when the mutineers were freed and once for the mutiny) which doesn't seem like significant coverage to me. Certainly it's not enough to show the GNG is met. His role in the mutiny is undeniable, but it seems more like WP:BLP1E. Sandals1 (talk) 20:17, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I hate to reply to everyone, but I'm confuse by what you mean by His name is only mentioned twice in Anthony's Historical Dictionary? I can find the following mentions of him: (1) A full entry entry under "LASSALLE, Reginald Andrew [Rex] (1945-)"; (2) Three mentions in the "MUTINY OF 1970" entry; (3) Two mentions in the "SHAH, Raffique (1946-)" entry. So I'm a bit confused by what you mean. Guettarda (talk) 03:02, 9 January 2019 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I added a profile of Lassalle by Hugh O'Shaughnessy, who obviously interviewed him during his trial or after his release. It puts Lassalle's radicalisation into context. It's short, as you might expect from a piece in a print newspaper in the early 70s, but it added a lot to my understanding of Lassalle. Guettarda (talk) 04:43, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep There are now sufficient independent sources.Rathfelder (talk) 14:24, 9 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep A much improved article which focuses on his role in the attempted mutiny, and has sufficient independent, reliable sources for that. RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:14, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 21:46, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per sleuthing as above and per nominator's gracious concurrence. -The Gnome (talk) 09:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.