- 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. (non-admin closure) CoolSkittle ( talk) 11:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Edward Dearle
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Edward Dearle ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It is my belief that this does not meet the notability requirements of Wikipedia. The individual produced several works during their life, but none of any notability or influence on later creators. References do exist to the individual, but these are passing references and do not meet the requirements of WP:N "Significant Coverage". The individual did, during their lifetime, win an award for their work but neither the work nor the award appears to hold any particular significance. As such, I propose this for deletion. I do believe that I could have proposed this under PROD, but as I am a newcomer to Wikipedia and have already proposed an article for deletion under that process already I thought it best to ensure I am not acting out of line, as the fact that I am so easily finding these articles suggests to me that my understanding of what should and shouldn't be on Wikipedia is flawed. NoCOBOL ( talk) 15:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. NoCOBOL ( talk) 15:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ifnord ( talk) 00:46, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - The page lists number of references, albeit 19th century references, that appear to sustain notability. Winning a prize also indicates notability. Since notability, once gained, is permanent, the lack of more modern sources indicating notability does not matter. FOARP ( talk) 10:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- This one is a hard one to judge based on the amount of 19th-century print sources, but I'm going to say keep on this one. Source 1 on the page is most definitely significant coverage, and if it can in fact be verified that he helped found a notable institution in Trinity College London (the college has nothing for nineteenth-century history on its website), that would further cement notability. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 16:17, 14 December 2018 (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.
- 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. (non-admin closure) CoolSkittle ( talk) 11:05, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Edward Dearle
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Edward Dearle ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
It is my belief that this does not meet the notability requirements of Wikipedia. The individual produced several works during their life, but none of any notability or influence on later creators. References do exist to the individual, but these are passing references and do not meet the requirements of WP:N "Significant Coverage". The individual did, during their lifetime, win an award for their work but neither the work nor the award appears to hold any particular significance. As such, I propose this for deletion. I do believe that I could have proposed this under PROD, but as I am a newcomer to Wikipedia and have already proposed an article for deletion under that process already I thought it best to ensure I am not acting out of line, as the fact that I am so easily finding these articles suggests to me that my understanding of what should and shouldn't be on Wikipedia is flawed. NoCOBOL ( talk) 15:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. NoCOBOL ( talk) 15:24, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:26, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:27, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ifnord ( talk) 00:46, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- Keep - The page lists number of references, albeit 19th century references, that appear to sustain notability. Winning a prize also indicates notability. Since notability, once gained, is permanent, the lack of more modern sources indicating notability does not matter. FOARP ( talk) 10:07, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
- This one is a hard one to judge based on the amount of 19th-century print sources, but I'm going to say keep on this one. Source 1 on the page is most definitely significant coverage, and if it can in fact be verified that he helped found a notable institution in Trinity College London (the college has nothing for nineteenth-century history on its website), that would further cement notability. Willsome429 ( say hey or see my edits!) 16:17, 14 December 2018 (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.