Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominic Ingram

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dominic Ingram

[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)

Historian and 'officer of arms' - not notable, fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. No sources presented, search reveals no other claim of notability is probable or even possible. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, History, and United Kingdom. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- The office of Portcullis Pursuivant is one of a number of posts in the College of Heralds. Some holders of the office appear to have been WP-notable, but the list in that article is clearly incomplete and includes a number of redlinks for pursuivants whom no one has thought to write an article about. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- But it's not actually relevant whether anyone has written an article yet, is it? Wikipedia is an ongoing project. There are countless thousands of notable people who don't yet have articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources cited are not independent and do not contribute to notability; I can find no evidence of any in depth independent sources. Portcullis Pursuivant is a junior position, there's no particular reason to expect that sources exist, and nobody seems to have found any sources since this article was prodded on 1 October. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:57, 26 October 2022 (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.