Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Brooke Dunlop
Appearance
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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. Michig (talk) 08:53, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Eric Brooke Dunlop (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Appears to be a non-notable ornithologist. Article does not claim any notability. Only sources are obituaries in The_Auk and Ibis_(journal). I could only access the former, which also showed no indication of notability. When it comes to AfD, this article seems to be a similar case to the recent Rev. Samuel Gilbert Scott article. David_FLXD (Talk) 17:38, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Obituaries in The Auk and Ibis are evidence of notability and meet WP:GNG. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:16, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:16, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The obit indicates no notability. The key phrase is: "Another promising young ornithologist has fallen a victim to the war ... Eric Dunlop,... at the age of 30. " The obit goes on to discuss the work he was preparing, and the opportunities he had. The Auk has always included very short articles, and writing a number of them is not necessarily a scientific accomplishment. In short, what we'd call "not yet notable" To judge better, check the obita in the same pdf for the others: (1) Edward Pearson Ramsey, Director of a National Museum, Honorary Ll.D, founder Linnean Society of NSW, described as "The leading ornithologist in Australia." (2) Emil August Goeldi, Directorship of a museum that became so important it was renamed after him, publisher of multiple volumes, discoverer of the mosquito carrier of Yellow Fever, Prof of Zoology at Bern.
- Those are notable ornithologists. This is why we differentiate between routine and substantial obits. DGG ( talk ) 01:20, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per DGG above. This deletion is contentious because it at the surface appears to have a valid notable obit, but upon deeper examination does not reveal any especial notability. -T.I.M(Contact) 03:04, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, agree that the obit looks like it makes him notable at first glance, but when you look deeper at it there's not really that much there from a notability standpoint. Lankiveil (speak to me) 07:53, 19 January 2013 (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.