Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Graham Davis, Sr.
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 01:37, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Joseph Graham Davis, Sr.[edit]
- Joseph Graham Davis, Sr. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notable only for who he is related to (father of Gray Davis and son of a wealthy man), but notability is not inherited. The article is heavily sourced, but virtually all the sources are about other people. MelanieN (talk) 18:58, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We're discussing the proposal to remove a well documented article on the oldest surviving son and heir of an infamous Nazi Abwehr agent and American oil tycoon William Rhodes Davis. The subject of the article in question, in addition to being the son of a traitor who worked to influence the outcome of the United States presidential election, 1940 by directly funding the campaign of Wendell Willkie with funds provided for that purpose by Hermann Göring, happened to have been a young man who inherited as much as $5 million from the estate of his infamous father, a huge sum in 1941, later fathered and named after himself, the only governor of the most populous U.S. state to be recalled from office by referendum, Joseph Graham Davis, Jr., aka Gray Davis.
Joseph Graham Davis, Sr. had a placque and a tree planted in his memory in California State Capitol Museum Capitol Park, and he married a French Countess in 1965.
Considering all of the above, and my observation that there was a precedent, the article on Gustav Schwarzenegger, a seemingly insignificant man who qualified as "notable" only because he was the father of the body builder/movie star who succeeded Gray Davis as California's governor. MelanieN's reasons for disqualifying Davis, Sr., are a more compelling argument for the removal of the article on Harald Quandt, a man unknown in the U.S. and notable because of his Nazi German parents. He later operated with his half brother, their father's business holdings for a time before his early death. Joseph Graham Davis, Sr. inherited a fortune accumulated through his father's sale and refining (Davis's father owned Eurotank Refinery in Hamburg, Germany in 1940) of expropriated and embargoed Mexican petroleum to the Nazi Luftwaffe and Navy. He was the son of an infamous traitor, he named a future, very prominent governor, and he later married a French Countess. Consider permitting his wikipedia article to stay, as the articles on Gustav Schwarzenegger, Harald Quandt, as well as other examples, on (FDR's grandfather) Isaac Roosevelt, (Hillary Clinton's mother) Dorothy Howell Rodham, and Tad Lincoln, have all been accepted as covering notable individuals. Ruidoso (talk) 06:34, 1 August 2010 (UTC) Ruidoso (talk) 07:35, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for several reasons. First, the subject is not notable. Notability is not inherited, so what his father or his son did is irrelevant in the context of this debate. We need to look at the subject's own life and achievements to establish notability. A plaque and a French countess are not, based on my knowledge of Wikipedia policy, criteria for recognising notability. Secondly, there is a problem with verifiability. The article many have many sources, but that does not necessarily equate to a "well sourced" article. Notability, according to Wikipedia policy, needs to be verified by independant, reliable, secondary sources. Many of this article's references are primary sources, such as estate details, etc. The editor has used these for his/her own original research. The requirement for secondary sources stems from the fact that, to be notable, other people have to be writing about the subject. The article fails the core Wikipedia principles of notability and verifiability. Finally, see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists for an essay as to why the argument that "other stuff exists" is not valid. Wikipeterproject (talk) 13:31, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The article is extremely well sourced. It includes links to numerous newspaper articles supporting the family realtionships. It also includes a link to a court transcript naming all of the relevant family members mentioned in the body of the article, Davis, his father, a description of the date of his father's death and of his estate, his brother's name, and his stepmother's name. His weddding announcement includes his father's name, and his second wedding announcement does, also. The wedding announcement of his daughter includes his father's name, his son, Gray Davis's given name, and his first wife, Doris Meyer's name. The obituary of Doris Meyer Morrell includes information matching the linked wedding announcements of her marriage to Joseph Graham Davis and as well as the names of each of their children. Again, the article should stay, or for the sake of uniform policy, (Is uniformity of the policy of what is or isn't notable, a goal?) the articles on Schwarzenegger's father, FDR's grandfather, Hillary Clinton's mother, and Lincoln's son should all be put through this same "process." How many men is contempary U.S. times or in its history, have been the son of a traitor and secret enemy agent, as well as the father of a prominent governor of the most populous state? Consider also, that "Gray" Davis is confusing, in that it is a nickname. Permitting an article on his father helps to explain and clear up this informal name change. Many are not even aware that he is Joseph Graham Davis, Jr. If you have a sense that Wikipedia is leaving an historic, encyclopedic record, there is a stronger argument for leaving this article in Wikipedia than there is for leaving the example articles I have presented. Ruidoso (talk) 15:37, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. You've made your point twice now. Wikipedia policy is what matters and that is on what we ought to center this debate. Again, consider reading WP:OTHERSTUFF to get an insight into why the argument that "other stuff exists" is not a sound argument for inclusion in the encyclopedia. As far as a historical record is concerned, JG Davis snr is mentioned in the articles on both his father and his son, so that is in order. Finally, as I argued above, many sources does not necessarily equate to "well sourced". The sources included in this article do not verify any notability. Several of them are primary sources, which may suggest original research. We should let the debate run its course - I think you have already made your point quite thoroughly. Wikipeterproject (talk) 17:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment to Ruidoso: Thanks for your thoughts, and thanks for writing this and other articles for Wikipedia. You did a very thorough job of sourcing this article, but unfortunately most of the sources simply show who he is related to - not what he himself ever did to be notable. I looked into your examples of other articles, thinking that perhaps Gustav Schwarzenegger or Harald Quandt should also be nominated for deletion. But it turns out that Gustav Schwarzenegger got quite a bit of publicity specifically about himself, because of his Nazi past, which makes him notable - and Quandt actually ran one of the biggest industrial empires in Germany for a while. All JGDSr. did was 1) inherit a bunch of money which he spent in non-notable ways, and 2) father a son who went on to become notable. The proper place to expound on JGDSr.'s family name and family background is at the Gray Davis article, and I would encourage you to add a few sentences to that article, regardless of what becomes of this article. Right now all it says about Gray Davis's father is that he was an alcoholic, which is totally inadequate. The Gray Davis article should explain, at a minimum, the wealth and notoriety of his grandfather (who clearly IS notable), and a little about his father. Since Gray Davis is a living person, anything added along those lines would have to be well sourced because of WP:BLP. --MelanieN (talk) 19:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment also to Ruidoso: I second the appreciation you have put into this and other articles and the effort you have made with sourcing. I had a look at the article and will try to contribute to the William Rhodes Davis article when I get some time. I had never heard of him before and it is quite a fascinating story! I would also second Melanie's encouragement to expand Gray Davis's article with a few more sentences about his father, regardless of the outcome of this debate. These debates can be ruthless, but they are not personal, and the fact that I am supporting the deletion doesn't, in any way, mean that I don't appreciate the effort put into the article. Wikipeterproject (talk) 19:22, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment to Ruidoso: Thanks for your thoughts, and thanks for writing this and other articles for Wikipedia. You did a very thorough job of sourcing this article, but unfortunately most of the sources simply show who he is related to - not what he himself ever did to be notable. I looked into your examples of other articles, thinking that perhaps Gustav Schwarzenegger or Harald Quandt should also be nominated for deletion. But it turns out that Gustav Schwarzenegger got quite a bit of publicity specifically about himself, because of his Nazi past, which makes him notable - and Quandt actually ran one of the biggest industrial empires in Germany for a while. All JGDSr. did was 1) inherit a bunch of money which he spent in non-notable ways, and 2) father a son who went on to become notable. The proper place to expound on JGDSr.'s family name and family background is at the Gray Davis article, and I would encourage you to add a few sentences to that article, regardless of what becomes of this article. Right now all it says about Gray Davis's father is that he was an alcoholic, which is totally inadequate. The Gray Davis article should explain, at a minimum, the wealth and notoriety of his grandfather (who clearly IS notable), and a little about his father. Since Gray Davis is a living person, anything added along those lines would have to be well sourced because of WP:BLP. --MelanieN (talk) 19:04, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. You've made your point twice now. Wikipedia policy is what matters and that is on what we ought to center this debate. Again, consider reading WP:OTHERSTUFF to get an insight into why the argument that "other stuff exists" is not a sound argument for inclusion in the encyclopedia. As far as a historical record is concerned, JG Davis snr is mentioned in the articles on both his father and his son, so that is in order. Finally, as I argued above, many sources does not necessarily equate to "well sourced". The sources included in this article do not verify any notability. Several of them are primary sources, which may suggest original research. We should let the debate run its course - I think you have already made your point quite thoroughly. Wikipeterproject (talk) 17:14, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Article amply demonstrates the notability of the subject's father and son, but does nothing to demonstrate the notability of the subject himself. Edward321 (talk) 22:05, 1 August 2010 (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.