Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justus Goebel

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. (non-admin closure) Red Phoenix ^talk 03:13, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Justus Goebel[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non notable brother of a Kentucky governor. One small article when he was indicted, an obituary in a smallish industry jurnal, and that's it. His brother gets a lengthy lemma in the "Encyclopedia of Northern Kentucky"[1], and Justus isn't even mentioned. Google and Google Books failed to produce more results (among the sources for his brother, confusingly named William Justus Goebel). Fram (talk) 12:49, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:26, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom, poor sourcing.--Rusf10 (talk) 16:30, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ It appears the subject's claim to fame is that his brother was a governor. Otherwise, sourcing shows the subject was president of a furniture company, was indicted for embezzlement (apparently not convicted), and was a Kentucky delegate one year to a Democratic National Convention. Does not meet basic notability standards. - Keep I withdraw my earlier ivote after doing a broader online source search and finding vintage newspaper coverage of speeches the subject gave and more info about his hunt for his brother's killer. I, therefore, believe the subject, a high-profile activist in his day, meets notability guidelines. AuthorAuthor (talk) 19:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC) - AuthorAuthor (talk) 08:45, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:HEY, I did a little sourcing, the problem is that when you run a new archive search there is not too little sourcing, the problem is there is far too much INDEPTH in old newspapers, often in archives that are paywalled. He was one of three brothers, one becomes governor of Kentucky, another becomes wealthy and leaves his fortune to our man Justus, who was already rich and apparently becomes very rich. When the Governor dies Justus moves to Kentucky to take over his brother's political machine. And spends a lot of time, effort and money trying to figure out who killed his brother. At that point I decided to just leave the several new sources on the page, and point out here that the fin de siecle newspaper coverage of him (bribing politically people as part of his political involvement) makes this just one of the many, many articles we have on old time political and business figures whose articles need improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are plenty of sources to meet WP:GNG, although they may not come up in a casual search. It appears this is a case of recency bias, because the sources are not in-your-face on the internet. They are on paper, microfilm, and in old newspapers (including the NY Times), but often behind paywalls. He made page 2 of the NY Times in 2/09/1900. The article may not be in a perfect state now, but there is WP:TIME to make it better.Jacona (talk) 11:00, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

None of the reasons for deletion listed in the deletion policy are met. The general notability guideline is met.Jacona (talk) 11:23, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's sad to see these sort of nominations. The references cited look sufficient to me, thanks to the recent editors. Wikipedia:Newspapers.com (free access for Wikipedians) for 1870-1908 and excluding "William Justus" (to exclude William Justus and his son "Justus Goebel Jnr.) throws up 1493 hits. But there was a racehorse called "Justus Goebel" which messes things up! Mostly passing mentions and, yes, the bribery charges were dropped. He was quite a big noise in Kentucky but never ran for office - certainly pulled lots of strings though. Only 19 obituaries, all in Kentucky papers. I'm hamstrung by not knowing which were the major newspapers in 19th century America for me to adequately reply to people who (wrongly) believe coverage must be at least regional. Thincat (talk) 09:51, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Comes across as meeting WP:BASIC. Wording here "comes across" is based upon my not being able to access some of the sources in the article, per paywalling/subscription required. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:02, 21 August 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.