Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Edwyn Burnaby: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:14, 12 June 2007 editRichardWeiss (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users75,870 edits []: hope you like my indent← Previous edit Revision as of 21:17, 12 June 2007 edit undoVintagekits (talk | contribs)22,333 edits []: remove an ENext edit →
Line 17: Line 17:
:*'''Comment''', which part of ] states that if you hold a public office you are notable? Infact it states the opposite. As for ''"someone will find this interested and useful, and it's not up to us to debate who it is"'' - What can you say to that!?--] 20:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC) :*'''Comment''', which part of ] states that if you hold a public office you are notable? Infact it states the opposite. As for ''"someone will find this interested and useful, and it's not up to us to debate who it is"'' - What can you say to that!?--] 20:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
::*'''reponse to vintagekits''' this is exactly what wp:BIO says about politicians: "Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures." This is a provincewide office. period. there are secondary sources to establish notability. period. i dare say also that i feel your continued comments that respond to every single comment people put on here is bothersome and annoying. let other people get into the discussion. some people don't want to have their opinions heard if they feel someone is going to scream at them every time. ] 21:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC) ::*'''reponse to vintagekits''' this is exactly what wp:BIO says about politicians: "Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures." This is a provincewide office. period. there are secondary sources to establish notability. period. i dare say also that i feel your continued comments that respond to every single comment people put on here is bothersome and annoying. let other people get into the discussion. some people don't want to have their opinions heard if they feel someone is going to scream at them every time. ] 21:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
:::*I am not going to have a slanging match with you because you seem like the type of person that would never change his mind even if he thought he was wrong so what I will do is ask you what Provience is it?--] 21:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC) :::*I am not going to have a slanging match with you because you seem like the type of person that would never change his mind even if he thought he was wrong so what I will do is ask you what Province is it?--] 21:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
::::*Huh, it looks like one of your typos but isnt found elsewhere on the page, ] 21:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC) ::::*Huh, it looks like one of your typos but isnt found elsewhere on the page, ] 21:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)



Revision as of 21:17, 12 June 2007

Edwyn Burnaby

Edwyn Burnaby (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Attempts to discuss notability have been ignored so I am forced to AfD. This person held no notable title or role. He held purely ceremonial role such as Deputy Sheriff and Deputy Lieutenant during his 60's before his death but these title hold no actual power and are purely ceremonial - therefore failing WP:BIO. Vintagekits 15:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Not a voteIf you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.
  • Strong keep. He was High Sheriff of Leicestershire which is notable, albeit within a limited circle! Certainly notable enough for the fact to be recorded in publicly accessible secondary sources - the very definition of notability. Many English counties have lists of High Sheriffs (see here) although Leicestershire is not among them as yet. All those with lists carry a request to expand them - in other words to create more articles like the one being slated for deletion here! Personally I have no interest in minor 19th century English aristocrats, but I'm sure there are people who do. Kim Dent-Brown 15:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete* No point in getting bogged down on such insignificant roles in history. Are we to include local councillors who at least were voted into position? I think not Coeur-sang 16:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep notable, SqueakBox 17:26, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I can't see the value of having him in the Encyclopedia. If we let the site get bogged down with usual information it defeats the point of wikipedia. The site is for recording useful and valuable knowledge. Not trival matters such as this. I know someone that served as he of my city's Committee of Adjusts, he shouldn't be on wikipedia nor should Edwyn Burnaby. If the site was to list all the people in English history that 'served' in these useless positions what good would it serve?Maplecelt 17:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. High sheriff is a largely ceremonial appointment, not a substantial judicial office (and not even local judges would normally be notable, let alone an attendanc office akin to bailiff). The remainder of the entry is genealogical. --Dhartung | Talk 19:25, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • keep if you read WP:ISNOTPAPER, you'll find it doesn't matter how many we get 'bogged down with.' We are to assume unlimited space, and as such the only criteria for this entry should be verifiability & notability. Verifiability is met, but notability is questioned by the nom and others. I don't see the claim of "no notability." This man held a public office, whether you consider it to be ceremonial or not or 'interesting' or not is entirely besides the point. someone will find this interested and useful, and it's not up to us to debate who it is. He held a public office and it is documented, therefore he meet WP:BIO. Barsportsunlimited 19:29, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment, which part of WP:BIO states that if you hold a public office you are notable? Infact it states the opposite. As for "someone will find this interested and useful, and it's not up to us to debate who it is" - What can you say to that!?--Vintagekits 20:20, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • reponse to vintagekits this is exactly what wp:BIO says about politicians: "Politicians who have held international, national or statewide/provincewide office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislatures." This is a provincewide office. period. there are secondary sources to establish notability. period. i dare say also that i feel your continued comments that respond to every single comment people put on here is bothersome and annoying. let other people get into the discussion. some people don't want to have their opinions heard if they feel someone is going to scream at them every time. Barsportsunlimited 21:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • I am not going to have a slanging match with you because you seem like the type of person that would never change his mind even if he thought he was wrong so what I will do is ask you what Province is it?--Vintagekits 21:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete on the grounds that it is a largely honorary appointment and merely receiving it fails WP:N and WP:BIO. If we kept this because he held a ceremonial appointive post, then we would need to keep articles for all Kentucky Colonels , Indiana recipients of the Sagamore of the Wabash, Nebraska admirals , Admirals in the Texas Navy , and honorary Colonels of Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana, North Dakota, and Alabama. In some of these cases, the title was once actually a commission in the state militia or as an aide to the governor, but now they are ceremonial or honorary. Some but not all of the recipients of these awards were otherwise notable, as successful businessmen, entertainers, artists, civil rights pioneers, or athletes, so if a High Sheriff is otherwise notable he can certainly have an article. Edison 20:04, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, not a noteworthy figure for wikipedia to have an article on. Tiocfaidh Ár Lá! 20:39, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Categories: