Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octavius Freire Owen

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:11, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Octavius Freire Owen[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)

Found through New Pages Patrol, created 31-Mar-2022. No indication in article that this classicist and clergyman is notable. No footnotes. Bibliography references "Alumni Oxonienses", which does not look like a marker of notability. I have carried out WP:BEFORE and not found sources to add. Tacyarg (talk) 19:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 19:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 19:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tacyarg (talk) 19:29, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:PROF #3 (FSA) and WP:GNG (I have added a reference). His wife Emily also appears to be notable.[1] St Anselm (talk) 21:53, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
She certainly is! You inspired me. Coming soon: Draft:Emily_Owen CT55555 (talk) 13:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I note there is only one book and Wikipedia normally requires multiple for WP:GNG with three the norm. However, the book is from 1887 and still available online. Compared to 2022 when books are easily printed, you had to be important in 1887 to make it into a book, so to me that counts for a lot. Also he is close to being WP:AUTHOR as by translating Aristotle's (no less!) work into English, he really did play a major role as defined in criteria 3. Absent for a clear pass at 3 is someone doing a book review of his work, but mentioned that he translated it are vast. So to me that's a 90% pass on two notability criteria, plus the argument above for WP:PROF is persuasive. All these imperfect factors to me are enough for me to be comfortable to !vote keep. CT55555 (talk) 01:07, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I note the Alumni Oxonienses entry mentioned in the article says "for list of his works see Crockford." If only we could find Crockford... St Anselm (talk) 14:43, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a list, he's written/translated tons https://www.amazon.com/s?i=stripbooks&rh=p_27%3AOctavius+Freire+Owen&s=relevanceexprank&Adv-Srch-Books-Submit.x=37&Adv-Srch-Books-Submit.y=12&unfiltered=1&ref=sr_adv_b

I've rewritten the article. I really hope/assume the work demonstrates his notability. CT55555 (talk) 15:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 10:09, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as he passes WP:PROF and an important literary role in translating Aristotle, so the article should be kept in my view particularly as it has been improved since nomination, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:32, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reasons given. His Fellowship of the Society of Antiquaries also points to notability. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:35, 10 April 2022 (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.