Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Snedeker

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Snedeker

[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:BIO notability tests. This man seems to be of interest to his descendants (because he is the earliest known person with the family name), but he has not received significant coverage in published sources and there is not indication of his being important outside the family or a very local context (the article's best assertion for his notability is that he was one of the several founders of a colonial village). The three books cited in the article are a book (probably self-published) of family history and genealogy and two books of the history of the area where he lived. Before starting this AfD, I found online copies of the two history books, identified places where his name was mentioned, and added citations to the article. I found only peripheral mentions of him. He is also covered on the genealogical site WikiTree at https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Snedeker-9 in an article that has far more information and reference citations than the Wikipedia article, but nothing I see there indicates significant published coverage or demonstrates his importance to people who are not his descendants. Orlady (talk) 16:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Netherlands, and New York. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:29, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Reading earlier through Google Books, I saw a lot of mentions under four different names. There were one or more persons named after him but this was easy enough to separate. I agree with Orlady that the length of coverage is not a strength. The cumulative coverage, continued interest, and the fact there are no BLP concerns for this 17th-century historical figure do work in the article's favor. Also, while the descendants and other regional history buffs seem to pay attention to this figure (as already mentioned by Orlady), they do not try to make him into something he wasn't as we sometimes see. It's a healthy interest. I am leaning keep and would appreciate it if user:Ruud Buitelaar could also take a look, as Dutch and history. gidonb (talk) 05:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Reply. For the record, much of what you see in the current version of the article is content that I added to give the stub article a fighting chance. In the article version I found, the article claimed he was one of 3 founders of Midwout (a "fact" that was not supported by the histories cited; it appears to me that he was merely one of the three men whose names somebody remembered), and the main thrust of the article was on the meaning of the name Midwout. That's content that arguably could be moved into the article about Midwout. Orlady (talk) 15:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TBT, I hadn't examined the edit history, as I usually do. Just the product as is and the potential sources by NEXIST. Looking at the history, I am impressed and not surprised since I'm a longtime fan of your work around Wikipedia! gidonb (talk) 17:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Gidonb for inviting me to the discussion. I think @Orlady did an amazing job researching the subject. Jan Snedeker´s claim to fame is being a founder of Midwood but if history books about the New Netherlands colony hardly mention him, then it is not Wikipedia´s task to rewrite the books and insert his name. That said, I would love to see a publication about Snedeker and his life and works in New Netherlands. Until then, I support the delete vote. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:17, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:06, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The only thing I can see for notability is a magistrate, but we don't have much on that for sourcing. [1] seems to be a fictionalized account of his life, but beyond that, there isn't much. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 02:58, 6 April 2024 (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.