Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Drummond Matheson


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 22:28, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

William Drummond Matheson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Reason

Lack of a reliable source to confirm he was indeed a flying ace.Georgejdorner (talk) 18:22, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 November 27.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 18:27, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Clarkcj12 (talk) 19:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment : I don't have access to it, but this source appears to be fairly definitive:  There are small mentions elsewhere, along with, presumably, documentation of whatever earned him the Military Cross, but I'm not sure there's enough for notability, especially without being able to confirm whether he's listed in Above the Trenches. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 20:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Neither Above the Trenches nor its Supplement lists him.Georgejdorner (talk) 16:27, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. That pretty much puts the fork in the hopes of sourced notability here, I think. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:01, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm all alone in this, I suppose, but I don't find any of these arguments for retention convincing. The Flight International mention linked below and Supplement to the London Gazette 30064 are merely mentions of his receipt of the Military Cross. His mention in Supplement to the London Gazette 29852 is an entirely routine notice of an appointment. It's not in question that he was awarded the Military Cross, but the Military Cross is a third-level decoration, far from the expectations of WP:MILPEOPLE. I simply do not see a place in the notability guidelines for "everyone who downed five planes is inherently notable" absent anything else nontrivial about him in reliable sources, hand-waving efforts to declare otherwise at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history notwithstanding. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:18, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I would have suggested a redirect to List of World War I aces credited with 5 victories in lieu of deletion, but since the only evidence of his ace status is a citation that notes four of his air victories were on unspecified "other occasions", he does not satisfy the inclusion requirements for that list! Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 18:24, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep his Military Cross citation says he downed five aircraft. MilborneOne (talk) 19:13, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. If his MC citation says he was an ace then he was an ace. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:20, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 04:46, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Here's a source from 1918.     Aces are notable, as are kings.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  07:21, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. A citation in The London Gazette trumps a non-mention in Above the Trenches. How many times are we going to have to go through this? Clarityfiend (talk) 08:14, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep If the consensus has been that downing five aircraft = fighter ace = WP notability (not unreasonable) then there are no grounds for deletion. The London Gazette is a reliable source. --AJHingston (talk) 17:28, 4 December 2013 (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.