Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Quentin Walsh

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 and redirect to USS Quentin Walsh. Daniel (talk) 03:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Quentin Walsh

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Quentin Walsh (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG. One award of the Navy Cross and a rank of Captain (United States O-6) doesn't make him notable. His role as namesake of the planned USS Quentin Walsh can be set out on that page Mztourist (talk) 16:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

• Keep Although one award of the Navy Cross and a rank of Captain (United States O-6) doesn't make him notable per WP:SOLDIER, he did play an important part in a notable event, which has attracted WP:GNG coverage, and there is clearly sufficient material to construct a good article about him. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:04, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

By notable event do you mean D-Day? Was his role really "important"? Mztourist (talk) 04:08, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

• Redirect to USS Quentin Walsh. SOP for people who don't pass SOLDIER, but do have a ship named after them. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect to article about namesake ship. Intothatdarkness 20:03, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
• Delete not even close to being notable. I see no evidence that his role in D-Day was "an important part".John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:30, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

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.