Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Cicero Allen

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 keep‎. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 03:46, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

William Cicero Allen[edit]

[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)

Article was moved to AfC and then accepted by the same editor, despite multiple prior declinations. There remains no real evidence of notability. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:14, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:14, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: Within a few minutes of pointing out issues with the article and my marking it for deletion discussion an editor both removed these and also the AfD banner, without any explanation. It appears some liberties are being taken with standard protocols/codes of behavior. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:46, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ldm1954, Nothing intentional, just Wikipedia weirdness. I was actively editing while you made your changes and saved ten seconds after you. I thnk a glitch with a Beta tool saved my version of our edit conflict, without notifying me of the conflict. At least, that is the only thing I can figure out. Rublamb (talk) 06:51, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ldm1954, edit conflicts are not uncommon, especially on heavily edited pages like WP:ANI. Saving ones edit can sometimes result in deleting another edit made a second before yours. It looks like this was spotted and no harm was done. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:30, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I spotted it and reverted it. Ldm1954 (talk) 03:41, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, History, and North Carolina. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ unless better evidence of notability can be found. Xxanthippe (talk) 04:45, 10 November 2023 (UTC).[reply]
Keep Besides the Dictionary of North Carolina Biography entry, which cites several offline sources, significant coverage exists in these Asheville Citizen-Times profile, obituary, and remembrance, contemporary book announcement and review, and this 1997 journal article (pp. 256–257) that critically examines one of his books. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 14:40, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep enough to pass WP:BIO - Note extra sources from Hameltion above clipped and added KylieTastic (talk) 14:59, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I expanded this article in response to a request through the WP North Carolina. The nominator's complaint that the article was largely based on one source and needs additional sources has been addressed. It has now received a C-class rating from an independent editor. Allen was important in the early years of the state’s public education systems. He founded two schools (one which survives today) and was the superintendent of five school systems in North and South Carolina. He also authored textbooks, including one that was used in North Carolina for more than forty years. Notability is proved by three feature-length newspaper articles written when he was alive; these sources are not from his local newspaper but from the Asheville Citizen-Times which was/is the largest circulating newspaper in the western half of the state. Other significant coverage is an article in the Dictionary of North Carolina Biography, published by UNC Press. His death was announced in newspapers across the state; two obituaries are sources, including a lengthy one that was published in the news section and another from a leading newspaper in eastern NC. Of these six sources, five meet WP:GNG as being reliable, secondary, significant coverage, and independent of the subject. In addition, these and other sources fulfill the requirements of WP:NSUSTAINED. A quick scan shows that there are more sources available, including book reviews and details of his work in education. WP:NEXIST instructs to keep articles when sources exist for potential expansion. Rublamb (talk) 15:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I accepted this as an AFC submission because a brief look on Newspapers.com found extensive coverage of him, plus there were some decent ones present already, e.g. the NCPedia one, and then the ones I added (1 2 3). BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:53, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's a 495-word entry in the online Dictionary of North Carolina Biography which cites 5 other sources. None of these sources have been analysed by the nominator. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 11:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep SIGCOV exists Lightburst (talk) 15:25, 11 November 2023 (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.