Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vic Garth

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. The proposed merge can be discussed on the article's talk page. Shimeru (talk) 20:39, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Vic Garth

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

Unlikely to be expanded given there is only a few sources mentioning this person; most only indicate notability due to his death. At the least, a merge to a town crier related page might be warranted.

Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver seren^C 06:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have tagged this article for rescue. Silver seren^C 06:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added other sources to the article. They have enough other information that the article can be expanded. I think he's notable enough with the sources to keep the article. Silver seren^C 06:23, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete does not appear notable. Does this even qualify as a BLP1E? I don't think so. JBsupreme (talk) ✄ ✄ ✄ 07:48, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't he notable? It is also not WP:BLP1E, as this article isn't about a single event. Silver seren^C 07:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is significant coverage in reliable sources. Many people are only notable for one position that they've held or one role that they've performed. It is a big leap from that to WP:BIO1E. Sure this guy wasn't influential, but a number of sources have chosen to devote column space entirely to him. That makes him notable. --Mkativerata (talk) 23:02, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources are independent and reliable, so proves notability. There are almost certainly to be references in the Mercury newspaper as well. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 01:50, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I'm thinking a mention somewhere in Hobart would be better, I doubt this will ever grow beyond a stub. -- œ^™ 15:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Or Town crier, as the nom pointed out. -- œ ^™ 15:33, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I would probably be keen to agree with this merge into both Hobart and Town crier, due to the notable information of him being the world's oldest town crier in 2003. This article is not going to grow anymore than it is now. Jwoodger (talk) 00:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plenty of news sources about him. [1] When did he officially stop being town crier? Was it when he died? Dream Focus 00:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable, based on references added to article. There is no minimum length for Wikipedia articles, so this is fine just the way it is. Brad 02:32, 23 April 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.