Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homer Lafian

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. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:00, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Homer Lafian[edit]

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

Concerns over the notability, veracity, and verifiability of this article, as discussed at the talk page. Disputed prod. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:09, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Nick-D (talk) 11:33, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regretful delete I don't think that the available sources are sufficient to establish notability, especially as they do not appear to meet the criteria required for reliable sources. I have no doubt at all that the article was created in genuinely good faith. Nick-D (talk) 11:33, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ditto Nick-D, the sources used do not appear to meet WP:RS, and the subject does not appear to have significant coverage in multiple reliable sources per WP:GNG. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 12:05, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO and WP:SOLDIER. I couldn't find any reliable sources and he didn't play a major part in the war. Citrusbowler (talk) (contribs) (email me) 13:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I ask for some time as this is a new article. I made a proposal of deleting all controversial material. I am in the hunt for other sources in order to confirm some of this information and provide additional verifiability. Proudbolsahye (talk) 16:16, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (chinwag) @ 20:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (whisper) @ 20:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (yak) @ 20:52, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DeleteWP:GNG, WP:BIO and WP:SOLDIER Does not have the notability to warrant a page. He did not earn a Congressional Medal of Honor and was not a multiple service cross recipient. Feickus (talk) 21:35, 17 June 2013 (UTC)Feickus[reply]
Move to user-space. I do not know whether this man meets Wikipedia's notability requirements. If the article is moved to user-space, User:Proudbolsahye can develop it over time. If at some later date he/she feels the article demonstrates the notability of the subject, then he/she can move it back to article-space (and if it is still not evidently notable, it can be deleted).--Toddy1 (talk) 21:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Toddy1, that sounds like a good idea. I'll work on it and re-nominate it. I plan on reducing the article to bare minimum like I mentioned at the TP and see if I can get some local newspapers that the Lafian family has in their archives to thereby confirm his feats. Proudbolsahye (talk) 22:55, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Please see WP:HISTRS for the kind of sourcing which is recomended for articles concerning historical subjects. Local newspapers should generally not be considered a satisfactory source - even some major newspapers lack expertise in accurately presenting historical stories. Nick-D (talk) 02:28, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Nick-D, I've read WP:HISTRS and as you well know, local newspapers aren't going to be the only source to be provided. They will be there for additional verification of other sources, nothing more nothing less. Nick...I have created a user page for Lafian and as you can see, it is a working progress. Please feel free to let me know which parts of the article needs to be deleted or needs to remain. Proudbolsahye (talk) 03:48, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't "well know" what reliable sources you're planning to consult here - the ones provided in the article at present do not seem reliable to me I'm afraid. Nick-D (talk) 11:29, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think treating Homer Lafian as a "historical subject" and applying WP:HISTRS is setting the bar way too high. --108.45.72.196 (talk) 17:28, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, with option to Userfy; subject honorably served his nation, and received several notable mentions, however the subject of this AfD does not appear to have received significant coverage in reliable sources, there are sources that give the subject significant coverage, but their reliability is questionable and should be taken up at WP:RSN. If they are found to be notable, I would not be opposed to keeping this article. However, until that time, the sources do not appear to meet reliable source requirements, and the subject of this AfD does not appear to be notable. Therefore the subject appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:SOLDIER. Although two Silver Stars are exemplary, they are not sufficient for the subject to by considered notable on medals for valor alone.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 10:07, 18 June 2013 (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.