| Revision as of 09:46, 17 August 2007 editGordonofcartoon (talk | contribs)7,228 edits →[]: comments to comments← Previous edit | Revision as of 10:01, 17 August 2007 edit undoGordonofcartoon (talk | contribs)7,228 edits add to commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| **To the above comments: | **To the above comments: | ||
| ::1) He's notable or not, and the motive for the AFD doesn't affect that. | ::1) He's notable or not, and the motive for the AFD doesn't affect that. | ||
| ::2) What Google results? "Suggests he still remains a figurehead" is not the same as third-party sourcing that he was at the time, as stated in the article. ] 10:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ::2) What Google results? | |||
| ::3) I think there's no doubt that those who get a full article in the ''ODNB'' are notable. But the question is where to draw the line with those who get bit parts in other articles. | ::3) I think there's no doubt that those who get a full article in the ''ODNB'' are notable. But the question is where to draw the line with those who get bit parts in other articles. | ||
| ::I've added what there is (plus a bit more I found in ''The Times'') but it's not much. ''The Times'' makes no mention of him after 1849. ] 09:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC) | ::I've added what there is (plus a bit more I found in ''The Times'') but it's not much. ''The Times'' makes no mention of him after 1849. ] 09:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 10:01, 17 August 2007
Charles Pearce
AfDs for this article:- Charles Pearce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Pearce doesn't appear to be a notable figure, even within the Victorian anti-vaccination movement, compared to well-documented contemporaries such as William Tebb (whose inclusion I strongly supported) He has only about four lines in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography in the article for his better-known son, the medical astrologer Alfred James Pearce. Also this article has been tagged for sourcing since February, and is well up for review, plus there are signs of WP:SOAP in the use of the selective quotation. Gordonofcartoon 21:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 22:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:N, and WP:SOAP. Nenyedi • 23:18, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. Appears in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography; notable during his time for starting a movement of which a Google search suggests he still remains a figurehead. There seem to me to be signs of bias in the concerted recent AfDs of a number of subjects with an anti-vaccination stance. If selective quotation is a problem then fix it. Espresso Addict 03:12, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep we have always accepted ODNB as a sufficient standard of notability, as we do similar national biographic compendia. If he's worth a paragraph there, he's worth a paragraph here. I think their standards are as high as ours. If anyone thinks we are better able to judge than the professional historians there, I';d like to har an argument for why. DGG (talk) 08:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- To the above comments:
- 1) He's notable or not, and the motive for the AFD doesn't affect that.
- 2) What Google results? "Suggests he still remains a figurehead" is not the same as third-party sourcing that he was at the time, as stated in the article. Gordonofcartoon 10:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- 3) I think there's no doubt that those who get a full article in the ODNB are notable. But the question is where to draw the line with those who get bit parts in other articles.
- I've added what there is (plus a bit more I found in The Times) but it's not much. The Times makes no mention of him after 1849. Gordonofcartoon 09:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. First anti-vaccine medical man of note, and first to write an anti-vaccine book. john
- That needs third-party citations. Gordonofcartoon 09:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)