Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Donkin (physician)


 * 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 redirect to Meher Baba. Although there were more keep !votes than anything else, the sources provided did not hold up to scrutiny. As points out, Meher Baba is not an ideal redirect target because Donkin is not mentioned there, but no alternatives were put forward and redirects are cheap. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 21:23, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

William Donkin (physician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I fail to see an iota of notability of the subject and non-trivial significant coverage about it, except in some biographies and self-sources.Trivial mentions in a few books around the broader locus of the cult are located.

Has written some books but fails WP:NAUTHOR by aa mile or so.Overall, he existed and might have been too proximate to have breath roughly the same composition of air......But, notability isn't inherited and he fails our notability criterion by a mile.

Deletion or a redirection to Meher baba sought, as at Articles for deletion/Kitty Davy, Articles for deletion/Eruch Jessawala and Articles for deletion/Faredoon Driver, which dealt with very similar articles.

This t/p thread may provide some backgound aspects on the issue. ~ Winged Blades Godric 14:59, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  ~ Winged Blades Godric  15:00, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  ~ Winged Blades Godric  15:00, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 20:44, 2 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep COnsider the references. If someone writes a book about you, you're probably notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:56, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * --The website of the publication house states Oceanic Publishing is a self-publishing venture created primarily for book publishing. and also self-describes itself to be a house devoted to the Meher-Baba cult.Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 13:59, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, Donkin wrote books, and had a book written about him, as Eastman says. Notable in this subject area, which is a legitimate and notable subject area. Randy Kryn (talk) 21:11, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that writing books don't contribute an iota to the notability of the author, unless the book has been subject to numerous critical reviews, which covers the author or author has managed to retrieve significant coverage, independent of the book.Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 13:59, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:28, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   09:22, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Dazedbythebell (talk) 13:17, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Care to explain any? ~ Winged Blades Godric 14:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete and redirect, per request, to Meher Baba, with note that Donkin was a disciple. Having looked into the publishing house and the book written about Donkin a bit more, I noted the following: "Oceanic Publishing is a self-publishing venture created primarily for book publishing", as above; but, moreover, "Author Bob Mossman, a retired Canadian journalist, has been a follower of Meher Baba since 1967." per . That's more than enough for me to doubt the reliability and independence of Mossman as a source. So, given precedents Eruch Jessawala, Faredoon Driver, and Kitty Davy: delete and redirect. &mdash; Javert2113 (Let's chat!) 18:21, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, many other books cite Donkin or quote from him. (published by the State University of New York Press) . This book seems to have a lengthy piece on him. SpinningSpark 23:56, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Your first link does not work . The first link mentions Donkin as an author in a bibliography-list.
 * The one mentioned in the second link mentions Donkin in the trivial-est of manners.Both of them them are again hits as author in a long list of Meher-baba related bibliography.
 * I've no idea about whether you mean every author mentioned in the list passes our notability guideline.
 * As to the 3rd and 4th link, Meher House Publications isn't anything close to a reliable publisher, given that it's run by a trust of Meher Baba and has a (sort of) self-proclaimed goal to publish anything and everything related to Meher Baba.
 * Consequently, that does lend precise nothing to establishment of notability.
 * The last book,which do have a lengthy piece on him, is from the semi-official biographical hagiography of Meher Baba. (See Bhau's entry at WP).Common sense is that such books will cover a lot of trivial characters related to MeherBaba in grandest detail.
 * Best, ~ Winged Blades Godric 02:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the link, but I doubt you will like that one either. I never claimed those links were any more than mentions, but they are mentions as recommended further reading, thus indicating that the author thinks Donkin's work is notable. SpinningSpark 05:48, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that mere mentions do not lead to passage of notability guidelines. ~ Winged Blades Godric 06:28, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Meher baba. a disciple is not something that would be expected to have an article on Wikipedia, unless meet GNG or relevant notability guidelines such as NAUTHOR. In this case, I see both fails by a mile. Also note, the standard set for sources to support claims within an article is a lower standard than that for sources to establish WP:N. My comments are concerned with sources used to establish notability above. And I don't think the provided sources meet the criteria for establishing notability. The article has existed for over 5 full years without ever having any better sources added so I don't think we should keep it any longer. --Saqib (talk) 07:03, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You've absolutely hit the nail on the head when you say:--the standard set for sources to support claims within an article is a lower standard than that for sources to establish WP:N.I've no problems in utilizing the above sources for supporting claims but either individually or in totality, they fail to establish anything close to notability. ~ Winged Blades Godric 07:57, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Meher baba at a bare minimum. However, I'm not seeing substantial content there or picturing William Donkin as a search term either, so deletion is probably better. The keep votes don't have much substance as simply writing books does not satisfy WP:ACADEMIC, not to mention WP:INHERIT applies. There's not an appropriate level of secondary coverage in independent sources either. Kingofaces43 (talk) 23:06, 15 June 2018 (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.