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.
One of the survivors of the Birkenhead sinking, I am not convinced he passes WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE shows passing mentions in a handful of books in addition to
this 1902 work in which his career gets a couple of pages. Of the sources in the article one is not reliable and the other is the (blank) search page of a genealogy site. The article claims he held commissioned rank for two years but it was certainly not that of General which is stated in his infobox. There is no mention of a significant gallantry award.
Dumelow (
talk)
11:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Weak delete per nom. Cannot find evidence that the expectations of
WP:NSOLDIER,
WP:SIGCOV,
WP:VICTIM are met.
WP:BIO1E would seem to apply (in that the main/only material claim to notability is that the subject, together with 193 other people, survived the sinking of the Birkenhead). Any relevant detail, relating to the subject's role in that event, could likely be covered in the
HMS Birkenhead (1845) article. If cited/needed. Otherwise, while the article itself doesn't state as much, the
description of the subject/image used in the article seems to imply that the subject was awarded the
Meritorious Service Medal. I am not an expert (on how "important" this medal might be or how we now apply the
former notability standards in this area) but I'm not sure this contributes much to notability on its own. Absent other sources or evidences, mine is a "delete" recommendation...
Guliolopez (
talk)
12:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
As a note the MSM was awarded either for long service and good conduct (in which case it adds little to notability) or as a gallantry award. In this case the image description seems to suggest it was awarded in 1905 for gallantry. The history of British gallantry medals is a little complex (partly due to a distinction between medals awarded to officers and those to other ranks) at this time I believe it would have been the lowest-level gallantry award for other ranks, ranking below the
Victoria Cross and
Distinguished Conduct Medal -
Dumelow (
talk)
12:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Usually it would have been awarded for non-combat gallantry, with the VC and DCM reserved for gallantry in action. However, given he was 78 at the time of the award I suspect his MSM was for long and meritorious service, not for gallantry. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
14:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
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.
One of the survivors of the Birkenhead sinking, I am not convinced he passes WP:GNG. WP:BEFORE shows passing mentions in a handful of books in addition to
this 1902 work in which his career gets a couple of pages. Of the sources in the article one is not reliable and the other is the (blank) search page of a genealogy site. The article claims he held commissioned rank for two years but it was certainly not that of General which is stated in his infobox. There is no mention of a significant gallantry award.
Dumelow (
talk)
11:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Weak delete per nom. Cannot find evidence that the expectations of
WP:NSOLDIER,
WP:SIGCOV,
WP:VICTIM are met.
WP:BIO1E would seem to apply (in that the main/only material claim to notability is that the subject, together with 193 other people, survived the sinking of the Birkenhead). Any relevant detail, relating to the subject's role in that event, could likely be covered in the
HMS Birkenhead (1845) article. If cited/needed. Otherwise, while the article itself doesn't state as much, the
description of the subject/image used in the article seems to imply that the subject was awarded the
Meritorious Service Medal. I am not an expert (on how "important" this medal might be or how we now apply the
former notability standards in this area) but I'm not sure this contributes much to notability on its own. Absent other sources or evidences, mine is a "delete" recommendation...
Guliolopez (
talk)
12:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
As a note the MSM was awarded either for long service and good conduct (in which case it adds little to notability) or as a gallantry award. In this case the image description seems to suggest it was awarded in 1905 for gallantry. The history of British gallantry medals is a little complex (partly due to a distinction between medals awarded to officers and those to other ranks) at this time I believe it would have been the lowest-level gallantry award for other ranks, ranking below the
Victoria Cross and
Distinguished Conduct Medal -
Dumelow (
talk)
12:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
Usually it would have been awarded for non-combat gallantry, with the VC and DCM reserved for gallantry in action. However, given he was 78 at the time of the award I suspect his MSM was for long and meritorious service, not for gallantry. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
14:50, 4 March 2021 (UTC)reply
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.