Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leonard B. Smith

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. (non-admin closure) Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 21:38, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Leonard B. Smith

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

Spotting the battleship Bismarck is hardly enough to merit an article. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. He might pass WP:GNG. GNews turns up a 1981 Parade Magazine feature about him (and a German counterpart).[1] According to a newspaper book review[2], the 1977 book The U.S. Navy: An Illustrated History contains a "sketch" about him, but I'm unable to verify this independently. Here's a nice 2006 article from the Navy Times.[3] Here are some other articles about him, though I'm not sure about the RS status of the sources.[4][5] And there are hundreds of incidental mentions of him in books and news articles about the Bismarck. --Arxiloxos (talk) 03:41, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Although I created the article, I honestly don't know whether or not he is notable. I wrote it for some WWII vets who remembered him. Arxiloxos' comment seem to indicate noteworthiness though. Andrew Keenan Richardson (talk) 03:57, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:06, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not notable. Indicative of our systemic bias. Buckshot06 (talk) 21:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:CSB is not a reason to delete an article. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:42, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not saying it is. He's not sufficiently notable. Buckshot06 (talk) 07:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Given his status as one of the earliest Americans involved militarily in the war, I think he's notable enough for an article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 07:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Necrothesp and WP:OUTCOMES - we have usually kept 'firsts' of this type of person. Bearian (talk) 20:27, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree with Bushranger, Necrothesp & Bearian. Article needs a lot of work, but it is worth keeping. Jrcrin001 (talk) 00:19, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Spotting Bismarck may not be enough to merit an article. The amount of coverage he's gotten for that spotting, however, is. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 18:55, 20 September 2012 (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.