Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James M. Ryan

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 of the debate was Keep. Stifle 01:17, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

James M. Ryan

This person seems to be a complete no-mark. All pertinent links on page are red. Waste of space keeping this trivia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Light current (talk • contribs) 00:27, 5 January 2006

Keep I see no reason to delete an article just because it has a lot of red links in it. If he was indeed one of the wealthiest people in Newfoundland in the early twentieth century then he may be well worth an article. --DavidConrad 02:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as notable. Lots of Google results for '"james ryan" newfoundland'. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-05 02:18Z
Why delete famous people? That's two attempts at defiling our proper grandeur! Props to James Ryan, I feel thy Pain! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 153.42.239.174 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 5 January 2006
Keep Seems to be a reputable article, although the person himself is not of much importance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.0.161.209 (talk • contribs) 02:55, 5 January 2006 (AKA Schlockading?)
- Well, this does not seem a very good reason: even a very well-written/formatted etc. article on a non-nontable subject is still out of place here; but I cannot judge on this one, no vote 131.111.8.101 03:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. -- JJay 03:44, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. -- WB 06:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep seems notable as per the following links
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]

Jcuk 09:11, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - very notable person~~, and the nominator isn't even a registered user~~. Blackcats 10:51, 5 January 2006 (UTC) Oops - I realized he just forgot to sign. Blackcats 10:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ryan's Premises, as mentioned in the article, is a Canadian heritage site that deserves an article in itself (a future task I plan on tackling). The question is how you can have an article about a prominent and historical business without an article about its founder. The red ink, as it seems to get people all excited, are fodder for future articles. HJKeats 13:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. This one is marginal for me, but I'll side with the other voters above on this one. Evil Eye 13:20, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to all: Please don't forget to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). --DavidConrad 05:48, 6 January 2006 (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.