Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Watke


 * 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   no consensus. –MuZemike 00:15, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Robert Watke

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This is a procedural nomination of an expired prod with reason: The individual does not meet WP:BIO1E or WP:BIO generally. I feel this one required a debate before deleting, it at least has potential for merging even if it fails as a standalone.  Sp in ni ng  Spark  08:42, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I was on the fence, but as I looked at what is basically the sole source for the incident I decided for delete.  Watke was essentially a polical activist that engaged in criminal activity (arson), so I judged him against WP:PERP.  He fails the first two requirements easily, but I originally thought that he may have passed the third requirement; however he did not testify before the Senate Committee (the source is a trascript of the hearing) and was only mentioned once in the entire document.  I don't think that gives him adequate notability for inclusion.  Movementarian (Talk) 10:17, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete An interesting geneology project, but the subject fails WP:BIO1E, general WP:BIO, and, as noted above, WP:PERP. ALXVA (talk) 13:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep—there appear to be some apparently reliable sources backing this up, and a glance suggests that more could be found with relative ease. I think we should wait a bit on this one. ╟─ Treasury Tag ►  consulate  ─╢ 13:59, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'm not adverse to waiting to see if the article can be better sourced.  Movementarian (Talk) 14:11, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Even if this event were widely covered, wouldn't he still fail WP:BIO1E? And WP:PERP unless there is "persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role"? The article has been around over a year with nothing but the current sources, the most compelling of which (Interstate Commerce Commission testimony) only makes passing mention of him: "I think his name is Robert Watke." ALXVA (talk) 15:33, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. There is no deadline.  If someone wants to "adopt" the article and try and turn it into something better, I have no problem with that.  Perhaps they will be able to find better sources.  As it stands, given the information that I was able to locate, I am not changing my opinion.  I'm just willing to give someone else the time to try and bring it up to snuff as there is clearly a seed to potentially nurture.  Movementarian (Talk)
 * Comment That's reasonable. I would prefer it be deleted and then userfied or incubated though, since despite WP:OTHERSTUFF, I bet folks wanting to wikify their own geneology projects will point to the precedent. ALXVA (talk) 17:31, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Quite notable and discussed substantially in reliable independent sources. Freakshownerd (talk) 19:32, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment So what are the independent sources that substantially discuss this person? ALXVA (talk) 19:49, 11 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:00, 12 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I only saw one good reference that made one mention of the individual, and that wasn't even strong.  It said "I think his name was..."  Movementarian (Talk) 00:55, 12 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep significant historical figure. Adequately sourced.  DGG ( talk ) 03:37, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment With all due respect, DGG, what sources? Only one source is worth anything and it hardly mentions the subject, and only one time. In addition, even if there were several sources, this individual is known only for one event. Do you have anything to back up your statement that he is either a "significant historical figure" or that the article is "adequately sourced"? I would gladly change my !vote if anyone can find a source or two that actually discusses this person in any signifiant detail. ALXVA (talk) 05:15, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 08:09, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Comment I would suggest the material be merged into a related appropriate article. Hash789 (talk) 16:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Smerge (selectively merge) a tiny bit of this related to the elevator incident to Grain elevator. In the target article, there is presently no mention of conflict related to the market power of the railroads/grain elevator owners and the rise of cooperatively owned elevators. In the history of American agriculture the novel "The Octopus" by Norris also dealt with the monopoly power of the grain industry. This man is not someone who satisfies WP:BIO. He is alleged to have started a fire, but the outcome of his arrest is "unknown" according to the article. He gets a bare mention in some testimony. I am not seeing multiple reliable and independent sources with significant coverage of Watke. The article has all this biographical detail of his ancestors and family which would be more at home at some genealogical website. Edison (talk) 19:30, 23 June 2010 (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.