Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A. Frederick Oberlin

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 delete. Sandstein 19:51, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A. Frederick Oberlin

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. No indication of notability. Oberlin appears to be a locally "prominent" citizen who served in WWI. Mentioned in one secondary source; other sources include a blog and Find a Grave. Searching newspaper databases, Google books brings up nothing to show notability. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 18:11, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:11, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:11, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nice local history article, but I couldn't find any sources proving notability outside of Oberlin's hometown area. Fails WP:GNG. Hog Farm (talk) 22:00, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Delete (per below) Notability doesn't have any geographic criteria. A subject that is locally notable is still notable. From what I can tell, he has at least three secondary sources on him (a book, a website, and the bridge/bridge plaque). The subject meets WP:GNG. He even earned a medal from an allied country and has an honorific plaque on a bridge named after him. VF9 (talk) 22:14, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. No, it fails WP:GNG 1. Not all sources are created equal. The blog is not a proper source. There is next to no information in it. The only thing it does is suggests the existence of the bridge. That source should probably be removed from the article. Find a Grave records are self-published. Military Times self-describes as a database. There is only one true secondary source, and that is essentially a directory/profiles of Hamden citizens who served in WWI. Based on the length of the book, it appears to be inclusive of all soldiers in the town of, by 1920, about 8600 people. 2. Neither of the medals he received qualifies him for WP:MILPEOPLE. He was not high ranking and it appears that he didn't serve an important role in particularly decisive battles. 3. A non-notable structure being named after someone in the town does not add to his notability. Most towns have structures named after some of its citizens. Few of them are notable.DiamondRemley39 (talk) 23:00, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I’m convinced, delete now. VF9 (talk) 06:53, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article shows why blogs are poor sources. As far as I can tell, neither bridge that the plaque has been on was named for him. Shortly before he died, he oversaw the construction of a bridge that has since been torn down. A plaque was placed on the first bridge in his memory and when the bridge was replaced, the plaque was moved to a replica of the Ithiel Town#Town's lattice bridge at the Eli Whitney Museum (which doesn't mention him on their page about the bridge).[1][2] I have not yet found adequate coverage to support an article. BiologicalMe (talk) 04:54, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and discussion above, non notable serviceman. Geoffroi 18:17, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While Oberlin served his country honorably and also appeared to be an important member of his community, he does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:15, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this level of military awards is not enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:37, 19 November 2019 (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.