Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam B. Boyd (fireman)

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 no consensus. While leaning towards keep, there is no consensus here on whether the main notability guideline is met. Davewild (talk) 14:11, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sam B. Boyd (fireman)

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

Non-notable person Zackmann08 (talk) 05:30, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, does not meet WP:GNG —Мандичка^YO 😜 08:19, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets the minimum of GNG, he has reached the highest in his career. Coverage of death and funeral in paper. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:36, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Response: @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): What is the relevance of his reaching the highest in his career? Does this mean that any firefighter reaches a high rank merits a Wikipedia page? Also, any firefighter killed in the line will have an article about their funeral. I work with the fire department so don't think I am belittling his sacrifice... If anything just playing devil's advocate. --Zackmann08 (talk) 18:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:39, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Fails GNG, and Wikipedia is not a memorial. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What specific part of the GNG does it fail? He was not an ordinary fireman he was the president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 22:32, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Without that 'president of the IAFC', I'd have definitely said delete. As it is... I'm leaning towards keep, if you can find some more sources? DS (talk) 00:41, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced that that office confers notability, seeing as he's the only linked officeholder in the article's list. As for GNG, I don't see significant coverage. Even the obituary in the local newspaper covers only the immediate circumstances of his demise, next to nothing about his prior life. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:31, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. Needs more work. President of the IAFC may make him notable. Too early to tell.Zigzig20s (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Status as president of national association and death as a chief are two notability "hooks." The article already shows sufficient sourcing to sustain a biography. Esoteric, yes, but meets GNG. Carrite (talk) 19:56, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Carrite and the significant coverage in this article^WebCite from the Knoxville News Sentinel. Cunard (talk) 03:58, 30 May 2015 (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.