Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forrest Guth

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 delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:03, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Forrest Guth[edit]

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

Forrest Guth was a junior NCO in E Company, 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment during World War II. He participated in the three major actions involving E Company, although he was injured parachuting into the Netherlands and was evacuated. He fails to meet WP:SOLDIER based on rank (sergeant) or awards (Purple Heart). After the War, he taught school in Virginia and Delaware and does not meet WP:GNG. A book by Larry Alexander, In the Footsteps of the Band of Brothers, subtitled "A return to Easy Company's Battlefields with Sergeant Forrest Guth," was about the company not Guth. The source of the citations in the article is unclear; the page numbers don't match content of the copy of Alexander's book I was able to check out of my local library. Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:56, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Delaware-related deletion discussions. Georgia Army Vet Contribs Talk 00:57, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:43, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - Before the AfD, I expanded the article slightly to add information, largely coming from a 1993 interview with Guth by a (local) Wilmington, Delaware newspaper in the wake of Ambrose's 1992 original BoB book. The interview provides a few details about Guth's role in the book which are independent from the book itself, including his role as an interviewee and the use of his photos in the book. I also added a local source about his teaching career (there are a few other very passing mentions about this I did not add) and one local source about the use of his cabinets in a church (based on his late in life hobby). I'm not terribly happy with the state of the article, a few BoB individuals articles which were deleted were in a better state than this one. But I find the added details, especially from the 1993 interview, enough that I think there is encyclopedic content about this individual (passes V and NOR if the museums section is cited or cut; could likely pass NPOV if the military sections are reworded to reflect the less than reliable nature of some sources). I also note that the de Trez book about Guth is published by a publisher about which I could not find details, and I do not know if it should be considered very reliable. Smmurphy^(Talk) 14:30, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: the subject does not meet WP:SOLDIER and did not archieve anything significant otherwise. The name is not mention in the narrative in either the book nor the TV series article, so not suitable for a redirect either. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:43, 2 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Can't see any notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:24, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nothing comes close to notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:09, 6 April 2018 (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.