Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John J. Kennedy (Republic of Texas politician)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Firsfron of Ronchester 05:36, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
John J. Kennedy (Republic of Texas politician)[edit]
- John J. Kennedy (Republic of Texas politician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No particular assertion of notability made, sourcing is very limited. SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:11, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I was unable to find any reliable sources discussing his role in the Regulator-Moderator War in the Republic of Texas, which seems to be the main claim of notability. I will change my mind if anyone can dig up something substantive. Cullen328 (talk) 18:25, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- There is not a lot of information on the subject all together. Sourcing is sketchy in locations. If you're going to delete this page you need to delete the one on the R-M War. Also the article was also previously slated for deletion and was determined to be notable enough to keep. ALSO the source is a historical journal from Northeast Texas discussing the event and his place in it. See B. B. Paddock, History and Biographical Record of North and West Texas (Chicago: Lewis Publishing Co., 1906), Vol. II, pp. 493-494.Theseus1776 (talk) 04:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The previous deletion nomination was a speedy nomination on the grounds that no notability was asserted. The decline didn't mean that it was notable enough to keep, just that it wasn't non-notable enough to delete without a full discussion. And there's certainly enough sourcing out there to maintain an article on the Regulator-Moderator War, should someone want to go digging.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:47, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP: The cite is still from a historical journal from the region where the event occurred, less than 50 years from that time. The references are sketchy and the historical record is thin, regardless of what you claim. This article should be kept as I have seen dozens of articles regarding the Republic of Texas with fewer cites, etc. Also see this reference to Kennedy as a "famous Freemason" listed with Davy Crokett, etc. http://borderlodge.org/site/about-freemasonry/famous-masons/ Theseus1776 (talk) 15:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "This list of famous Texas Masons is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Lodge_of_Texas#Famous_Texas_Freemasons.".--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- He was a member of that lodge and is clearly of note. I didn't see their sourcing. You need to delete most of the articles on Wikipedia with your standards. Kennedy is mentioned in 2 historical records, one of which, as I have stated, IS reliable, IS from the region and time period in question, and IS clearly referenced in regards to his involvement in the R-M War. I don't see how this does not meet your notability guidelines; and yes, I have read the guidelines and believe that it suffices. Theseus1776 (talk) 15:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- See also: http://www.txgenes.com/TXHarrison/Civic/1857GrandLodge22.htm for list of Marshall Lodge 22's membership. #22 is a Republic of Texas lodge, which means it was chartered during the republican period.Theseus1776 (talk) 15:48, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- He was a member of that lodge and is clearly of note. I didn't see their sourcing. You need to delete most of the articles on Wikipedia with your standards. Kennedy is mentioned in 2 historical records, one of which, as I have stated, IS reliable, IS from the region and time period in question, and IS clearly referenced in regards to his involvement in the R-M War. I don't see how this does not meet your notability guidelines; and yes, I have read the guidelines and believe that it suffices. Theseus1776 (talk) 15:32, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- "This list of famous Texas Masons is taken from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Lodge_of_Texas#Famous_Texas_Freemasons.".--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 15:27, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP: The cite is still from a historical journal from the region where the event occurred, less than 50 years from that time. The references are sketchy and the historical record is thin, regardless of what you claim. This article should be kept as I have seen dozens of articles regarding the Republic of Texas with fewer cites, etc. Also see this reference to Kennedy as a "famous Freemason" listed with Davy Crokett, etc. http://borderlodge.org/site/about-freemasonry/famous-masons/ Theseus1776 (talk) 15:05, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- The previous deletion nomination was a speedy nomination on the grounds that no notability was asserted. The decline didn't mean that it was notable enough to keep, just that it wasn't non-notable enough to delete without a full discussion. And there's certainly enough sourcing out there to maintain an article on the Regulator-Moderator War, should someone want to go digging.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:47, 9 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:40, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I can't see what this individual is notable for. He doesn't appear to be a notable politician, or notable cavalry captain, or notable freemason. What makes him notable? I'll change my opinion if there is a worthwhile reference that explains why he is notable. A claim that he is a famous freemason doesn't quite hit the spot. Nipsonanomhmata (Talk) 01:00, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Then you haven't read the whole thread. The Regulator-Moderator War was the largest blood feud in American history and a major event in the history of the Republic of Texas. John J. Kennedy was the sheriff of the county while the war was raging and according to the cited, verified, and reliable citation helped end the conflict. 72.64.96.135 (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- And since I know that someone will claim that the source is not reliable I have included a link to the actual printed text, which is out of print: http://historical.ha.com/common/view_item.php?Sale_No=6046&Lot_No=42148 The citation is from a web forum that quotes the text verbatim. To verify the reliability of the text and the explicit reference to John J Kennedy in it, which is a notable mention, one just needs to search for the name of B.B. Paddock who authored the text. He was a 4 term mayor of Ft. Worth and was an expert on the region as any other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.64.96.135 (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Then you haven't read the whole thread. The Regulator-Moderator War was the largest blood feud in American history and a major event in the history of the Republic of Texas. John J. Kennedy was the sheriff of the county while the war was raging and according to the cited, verified, and reliable citation helped end the conflict. 72.64.96.135 (talk) 21:42, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP: This article has been shown to have merit time and time again. I support keeping it and improving it rather than deleting it.Theseus1776 (talk) 03:24, 17 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep sufficient evidence for an historical figure. DGG ( talk ) 03:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 03:56, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - I find it difficult to understand what would be gained by this deletion. There are vast waves of crap clogging the in-take valves at New Articles, that's where energy should be targeted, in my opinion. This is a stub about a historical figure. Only one footnote showing, so tag for more. Why delete? I just don't see it... Carrite (talk) 04:46, 23 April 2011 (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.