Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Ronald Richards

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 Speedy delete per the request of the author. This does not preclude another article about the subject. Hut 8.5 22:07, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

George Ronald Richards[edit]

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

A minor functionary, there are no substantial sources about him. Awarded the OBE, but my last survey showed that a large proportion even of current OBE awardees are not covered on Wikipedia. It's mainly awarded for quiet work in the background. Guy (Help!) 17:42, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Australian Dictionary of National Biography entry covers WP:ANYBIO. Mortee (talk) 18:45, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I've blanked this and listed it at WP:CP for the blatant copy-pasting from the Australian Dictionary of National Biography page – whole sentences lifted verbatim – to be dealt with. It's probably eligible as a G12, as there's only one substantive contributor. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:29, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See listing at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems/2017_March_4 —አቤል ዳዊት^?(Janweh64) (talk) 23:55, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:02, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:44, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There's no indication here of anything that makes this person a suitable subject for an encyclopaedia article: he was a policeman and then deputy director of a (national) government department, but what did he achieve, do or say that anyone would want to read about? WP:ANYBIO is indeed satisfied by his inclusion in the Australian Dictionary of National Biography, but that criterion is quite specific that, while "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the […] standards", "meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included". It's my understanding – open to correction – that an OBE is a fairly mundane honour routinely dished out to civil servants inter alia. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:42, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Justlettersandnumbers: - some quotes from the ADNB entry that might be relevant below. I'd say these are enough to warrant an article (as the ADNB clearly agreed). It includes a bibliography, too, so it should be possible to incorporate those sources.

"... deputy director-general of the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation..." (comparable to the FBI, according to our article)

"... sent to London to work with Military Intelligence, Section 5..." (MI5)

"... set in train the defection of Vladimir Petrov..."

"... served as chairman of the counter-subversion expert study group of SEATO..."

Mortee (talk) 11:09, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as a copyvio, with no prejudice against the creation of a new article on the same topic. ADB is usually a pretty good indicator that someone is notable and that multiple sources exist on them. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 04:29, 15 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]

Why delete first rather than rewriting now? I've been holding off editing because of the wording of the copyright template, waiting for that claim to receive attention, but if we agree that there should be an article about this person, shouldn't we rewrite this article rather than asking an administrator to delete it first? Mortee (talk) 17:35, 15 March 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.