Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard James Montagu


 * 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 delete. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:46, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Richard James Montagu

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable member of the resistance. Fails WP:SOLDIER and GNG - although his name is quite common so I may have missed an article somewhere relevant Gbawden (talk) 12:39, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  12:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  12:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  12:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  Nordic   Dragon  12:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Provisional Keep. On the contrary, if he received the DSO twice he clearly passes WP:SOLDIER ("2. Were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times"). The DSO was the second-highest gallantry and leadership decoration for officers. For a captain to win it twice was most unusual, since it was usually only awarded to officers of the rank of major or above (awards to a lower-ranking officer were much less common and were invariably for gallantry). However, my keep vote is provisional on further evidence being found and it proved not to be a hoax, as I can't find his DSOs gazetted in the London Gazette anywhere. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I can't find anything either. Not of the award, the person or the book listed as a source. Checked the Royal Navy list. Calling this one a hoax. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:32, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
 * More likely to have been in the Army List I should have thought? -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:03, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, it is rare for an Army captain to earn the DSO. Usually, if one does, it usually means that he just missed out on the VC. You have to be mentioned in despatches first. But for a peacetime award? Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Highly unlikely an RN captain would have been involved in the Channel Islands resistance. It's actually a fallacy that it was that rare for junior officers to win the DSO (I thought this too until I started researching honours); it was less common than senior officers, certainly, but not uncommon (for example, every surviving officer pilot in the Dambusters raid was awarded the DSO). And the DSO wouldn't be awarded in peace anyway, so if the article is true (and I have a suspicion it's a hoax) then both his DSOs would have been won during the war, not in peacetime Germany. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Possible keep -- It is difficult to tell with such a miniscule stub: what did he do in Germany after the war? Peterkingiron (talk) 20:12, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:10, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can't find the single source given, can't even find the author. Moving beyond unverifiable into improbable. That makes claim highly suspicious. GraemeLeggett (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - seems like a hoax to me. This seems telling, along with the fact that the supposed book cited does not seem to exist, as Graeme pointed out above. Parsecboy (talk) 19:21, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as barely any context and there's simply nothing to suggest a convincingly acceptable and better article. SwisterTwister   talk  23:16, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I cannot find sufficient coverage in reliable sources, and there is nothing to suggest inherent notability. Vanamonde93 (talk) 04:11, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as hoax. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:40, 24 March 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.