Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oscar M. Alcaraz

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. Kurykh (talk) 05:25, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oscar M. Alcaraz

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

Non notable person, Various copyright issues, no good version to revert to. Gamebuster19901 (Talk | Contributions) 17:45, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nomination but would support a recreation by a neutral editor if notability can actually be established. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:48, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:ANYBIO being a Presidential Medal of Merit recipient.--RioHondo (talk) 01:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination, but would support a recreation by a neutral editor if notability can actually be established, also suggest a look at Sherman L. Kiser, Samuel Stagg, and Joseph Stevenot for the same issues.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 11:08, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment - As stated above, I would support a recreation if notability can be established, and there were no copyright issues in the recreation Gamebuster19901 (Talk║Contributions) 15:05, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 03:46, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 05:55, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Stubify per WP:BATHWATER. The subject is notable but the article is a mess. Use the sources already present to pare it down, rather than wait for someone else to recreate it. The sources are usable and it's still reasonably salvageable.-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 11:24, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 01:11, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've went ahead and stubified it. GNG does not require that sources be available online and free, which appears to be the issue here. The burial in the national cemetery is verifiable and the award of the medal does meet WP:ANYBIO The existence of the bibliography in this article with specific dates and issues is what tips it for me. If we had access to these sources in front of us, it would be reasonable to assume that the coverage would be substantial enough to meet GNG. This is the basis of most of the exceptions to GNG anyway, and now that it has been stubified I don't see it doing harm to the encyclopedia. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:15, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closing admin about copyright: The copied text does not appear to be a violation of Filipino copyright law since like the United States, government works do not have copyright, and all of these seem to be works of the Filipino government. The one that is questionable is the monument citation because it is uncelar who wrote it, and if rev del were to be applied, it would need to be applied to all edits until this diff [1]. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:35, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - one of revered boy scouts who died on duty. There are literally monuments to these guys. Bearian (talk) 05:00, 27 February 2017 (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.