Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homer G. Lindsay, Jr.

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. As far as the vandalism goes, I know where my semi-protect button is, and am going to use it. Courcelles (talk) 01:07, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Homer G. Lindsay, Jr.[edit]

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

No reliable sources indicating this person is notable-- also this article is continually vandalized by editors claiming that this person's death was a judgment from God. Better to simply not have it, I think. -Starke Hathaway (talk) 14:05, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete There was one source, here, it was not in a ref tag though, which I fixed. The entire article seems to based of this one source. I'm leaning towards delete at the moment if no more sources can be found. — Strongjam (talk) 13:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added a second ref for date of his death, which was unsourced. I can't find much else in reliable sources. Seems his church was notable, but I don't see enough for a biography.— Strongjam (talk) 14:01, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 07:30, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to First Baptist Church of Jacksonville where he is mentioned as my searches found no better signs of improvement aside from Books links. SwisterTwister talk 07:31, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Vandalism is a poor reason to delete an article, especially if it is vandalism by a single user. St Anselm (talk) 07:53, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's also worth noting that one account is now unable to edit anymore and appeared to be a SPA anyway (they also used an IP before the account). With that also said, this has existed since February 2006 but has never gotten much improvement. SwisterTwister talk 07:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Just in Google Books there seemed to be enough significant coverage to pass the notability threshhold, though everything was snippet view. But the obituaries certainly provide the coverage needed, and when someone gets called "one of the great soul-winners of all Christian history", that's probably a fair indication of notability. I don't know why the Baptist Press obit wasn't there before, but I've added it in now. St Anselm (talk) 08:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep leading metropolitan daily did not just run an obit, it ran article about impact of his death, Here: [1] ; pre-obit news bulletin on his death Jere: [2]. And as per StAndelm.E.M.Gregory (talk) 08:36, 17 September 2015 (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.