Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norman Cota, Jr.

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Norman Cota, Jr.[edit]

I think we need to bring this here. WP:MEMORIAL firstly, and the issue of sourcing has been brought up at Talk:Norman Cota, Jr.. There are very dubious assertions of notability (undefined and unsourced "was associated with" ... "alledged (sic) that he was at times associated with" ..."it was said") and sourcing from Find A Grave that is not reliable (being user-contributed). If the background is true, it's extremely creditable (I've nothing against that) but these shaky and unproven appeals to association look very iffy, and there is a general problem with the reliability of material from the creator (see the WP:COIN archive). Gordonofcartoon (talk) 00:22, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Three times the big claim is that he is the son of Norman Cota, who is notable. Unfortunately, notability isn't genetic, or inherited. The lack of sources online doesn't bother me (lots of stuff this old suffers from the same issue), but even if you take the article as an accurate opinion (Original Research), it is still obvious how far they are stretching association to link him with notability. As a USAF vet, I have all the respect in the world for him and his accomplishments, but that doesn't mean he passes the criteria for inclusion. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 00:07, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral. If someone can find some citeable sources to support a claim of notibility, the article could stay. LinguistAtLarge (talk) 00:30, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- For what it is worth, a cursory look found exactly nothing (9 unrelated or Wiki hits). Not even blog stuff from old military guys or forum hits. Exactly zero ghits on google books, google scholar and google blogs as well. It might could exist in print only since it was such a long time ago, but web sources are completely non-existent. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 01:25, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No real claim of notability, and sources are trivial. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 00:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No sources. The father (Norman Cota Sr.) is notable. Norman Cota Jr who is the subject of this article does not appear notable by our standards for military men. In a response to a posting at WP:COIN, whose link is provided above by Gordon, the creator of this article, Aedwardmoch, admits that he is a relative of the subject. In a second report at COIN, some editors objected that Moch was creating articles based on personal knowledge rather than reliable sources. This article would appear to be an example of that. EdJohnston (talk) 02:55, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. The COI itself isn't so much the problem as its leading to original research and synthesis, which hasn't been remedied after what seems a reasonable time.

If anyone's interested in this area of military history, help would be useful at Norman Cota, who's definitely notable - but the article has been expanded with similarly dubious material credited to "Various Internet interviews, comments and opinions from Alfred "Ed Moch" Cota. (Alledged) Biological Grandson of Gen. Norman D. Cota". Gordonofcartoon (talk) 14:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:46, 12 November 2008 (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.