Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Craig (Secret Service)


 * 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. Seems like there is a bit of disagreement whether the newly added sources satisfy WP:SIGCOV, but they appear to have addressed the WP:1E issues and most people commenting on the newly expanded article appear to support keeping. The earlier stage of the discussion was more supportive of deletion or redirecting, so this borders on a "no consensus" case. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:57, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

William Craig (Secret Service)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Pretty clear failure of WP:1E. Subject was a bodyguard assigned to US President Theodore Roosevelt and was killed in a traffic accident. Article is a perma-stub (created in 2006) with no realistic chance of expansion. While tragic, the incident is no more than a foot note in history. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:06, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ad Orientem (talk) 02:06, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:10, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:10, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:11, 9 May 2019 (UTC)


 * I can't find the news article that says they had a tribute for him 100 years later, or any other news article mentioning that. How much was written about him after he died?  They say people wrote about his death around the nation, it not just local coverage, but was just a passing mention or was there any significant coverage?   D r e a m Focus  03:23, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * He did get some short term news coverage because the accident involved President Roosevelt. But it was not WP:SUSTAINED and he has no claim to any kind of notability beyond his dying in a traffic crash that also involved the president. -Ad Orientem (talk) 16:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete He does seem to fail WP:1E.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:44, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep based on the notability of being the first Secret Service killed in the line of duty. TJRC (talk) 18:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Add: I'd also be fine with the Redirect suggested by Sam Sailor below. TJRC (talk) 23:33, 9 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Redirect per below. An existing mention in United States Secret Service is more than sufficient. It'd be different only if he were killed fending off a would-be assassin. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect as a categorized and  to   where he is mentioned. If it was me, I'd simply have WP:BLARED the article. If that is not contested, a discussion at AFD is not really needed. I have added a few book cites (there are many more to cite, but I think they give the same very short story), and I also dug up a citation to the Chicago Tribune, 2002. But I agree with nom, it is WP:1E case, and as a stand-alone article, it does not meet WP:BASIC/WP:GNG. Still, as the first person to die in the line of duty, a redirect is appropriate. Sam Sailor 18:54, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect as suggested would seem to be entirely appropriate. It is plausible someone could search for him on here, but the coverage in the United States Secret Service would seem to be sufficient (I would agree with User:Clarityfiend that if he had died during an assassination attempt then he probably would need a seperate article). Dunarc (talk) 22:44, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to United States Secret Service as suggested. Per my WP:BEFORE I do see wide coverage of Craig being the first to be killed on duty in the Secret Service, however there's not much meat in the coverage beyond details of the incident - making this a WP:BIO1E. Icewhiz (talk) 14:41, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've substantially expanded the article today.   William Craig is not merely notable for the way he died. He played a substantial role in the Roosevelt household, especially with the president's children, and establishing a security perimeter around their vacation home at Sagamore Hill that enabled them to enjoy some privacy.  See Morris, Edmund. Theodore Rex, pp. 123, 137, 142 (Random House Publishing Group, 2010). Morever, William Craig had some notability prior to his death in 1902, as a hunter of counterfeiters.  See Altoona Tribune, p. 6 (July 10, 1901); The Tennessean, p. 3 (January 22, 1901); Meyersdale Republic, p. 1 (August 15, 1901); Pittsburgh Daily Post, p. 1 (July 9, 1901); The Philadelphia Times (July 10, 1901).&#32;Anythingyouwant (talk) 12:02, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing anything beyond the sort of run of the mill coverage one would expect for a secret service man doing his job at the time. Likewise his involvement with Roosevelt and his family was not unusual and many agents became friendly with their protectees. Sorry, but I still believe his only real claim to notability lies in the sad circumstances surrounding his death. -Ad Orientem (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

I've added some more material from the Chicago Tribune: So, we've got coverage in reliable sources about his swordsmanship, & about his hunts for counterfeiters. Plus we have coverage about his work at Sagamore Hill for the POTUS. All separate from being one of only two Secret Service agents who ever died while protecting the POTUS, for which he is at least as notable as many others who have Wikipedia articles. I agree he wasn't a hugely important figure, but he wouldn't have all that coverage if he was just run of the mill either.&#32;Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:24, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * “Is Master of Sword; An English Horse Guard Who is Almost a Magician”, Chicago Tribune, p. 25 (April 2, 1893): “he carries his mastery to a point that makes one think of the feats of the mystics of India.”
 * “William Craig, Swordsman; Wonderful Feats of a Scotchman Who Has Seen War”, Chicago Tribune, p. 25 (February 9, 1896): “No other swordsman in the country has ever attempted the startling feats which the professor performs with his broadsword.”
 * Keep Over a hundred years later he did make news and got bagpipes played and whatnot at his grave. He was given coverage for more than just this one event as Anythingyouwant did prove.   D r e a m Focus  16:47, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment User:TonyTheTiger, User:TJRC, User:Clarityfiend, User:Sam Sailor, User:Dunarc, and User:Icewhiz, what do you think about the overhauled article?&#32;Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:45, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * My position is unchanged. Weak Keep, with the proposed redirect also acceptable. To elaborate, I think he's barely notable, but is its for one-event, so I can understand the call to deletion I think there's enough about him it's worth keeping in its own article, because that will necessarily be trimmed if moved into the redirect target. I think keeping is the better resolution, but I can see the case for the other dispositions. So, weak keep. TJRC (talk) 21:59, 15 May 2019 (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.