Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Withers
- 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 no consensus. JohnCD (talk) 23:38, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Harvey Withers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested PROD. Mr. Withers may be a respected antiques dealer and author, but it looks like he does not yet pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies. My search on Google News, Books, and Scholar didn't turn up any sources that looked like they would be enough to prove notability. — Mr. Stradivarius ♫ 11:06, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I do think that Harvey Withers has made a widely recognized contribution to his field and is part of the enduring historical record, it's just that a lot of discussion and comment about this fields off line so isn't as easy to references. As mentioned before he has documented and catalogued edged weapons from the 1400s to present day and this is a very important for an enduring historical record.
- Keep as per WP:AUTHOR. I believe he meets the requirements. There's an article about him in "Worth" magazine 2007, and he's been cited in "The international militaria collector's guide" --HighKing (talk) 13:19, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Found one decent article, Faint, Martin (19 May 2004), "Enterprise - Accidental businessmen are turning hobbies into a trade.", Birmingham Post. Problem is it's just a look what this local person is doing thing. Is there more info on the worth magazine piece? duffbeerforme (talk) 07:35, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, →Στc. 02:11, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2012 (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.