Ingenpedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Skinner (surgeon)

Alexander Skinner (surgeon)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not seeing coverage to establish IN:GNG. Simply owning thousands of acres doesn't inherently make one notable-- there are 27.376 million acres in va alone, according to google. Everything I got was he participated in a duel. this provides a decent amount of coverage, but a publisher of coloring books doesn't strike me as a reliable source here. JSTOR suggests an obituary, but it looks more like "local person died" than "a notable person died". Passing mention in and, but I don't see significant coverage in reliable sources that establishes GNG. PROD contested. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:14, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. Eddie891 Talk Work 02:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete fails IN:SOLDIER and IN:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a peculiar nomination; even stranger than the proposition that deletion would be uncontroversial. Owning lots of land seems to be a straw man as this is not the main basis of the subject's notability.  And appearing in lots of sources is not a lack of notability; quite the contrary.  The book George Washington's Kentucky Land seems to be quite respectable and well-researched and, insofar as it covers the subject in detail, is fine for our purpose.  And the subject appears in plenty of other works including The Centenary of Louisville; Kentucky Pioneer Doctors; Medicine in Kentucky; The Encyclopedia of Louisville; The American Struggle for the British West India Carrying-trade; The Field of Honor; Medicine in Virginia in the Eighteenth Century; and, of course, numerous records of the Continental Army and the Revolutionary War.  It is especially engaging to read that the subject was indicted by a grand jury for "profane swearing".  As such details have yet to be added to the article, the policy IN:ATD applies, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." Andrew🐉(talk) 09:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Let me address these sources brought as evidence of notability:
 * George Washington's Kentucky Land - The subject does receive significant coverage in this well researched book. All of the other sources would be considered passing mentions. Simply appearing in a literary work does not confer notability. The notability requirement states that the subject must receive sigcov in multiple reliable and independent sources. This requirement is not met. A subjects Army record is fine to use if notability is confirmed or if it is presumed but presumed notability can be rebutted as is the case here. IN:ATD only applies if notability has been established which it has not as per IN:N. I also conducted a IN:BEFORE to see if I could find anything further but could not. -- A Rose Wolf ( Talk ) 16:25, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * IN:GNG actually says that "There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage". That's what we have here -- a good detailed source and numerous other sources that provide other details about the subject, such as their views on duelling, their role in the medical history of Louisville and so forth.  Andrew🐉(talk) 18:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are going to quote something then at least quote the whole something and don't cherry pick to meet your own subjective opinions. I'll let others go there and read it for themselves to find out what is missing from your selective usage. -- A Rose Wolf ( Talk ) 19:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Which of these sources is significant independent coverage? Just listing off your hits on Google Books does not mean that where the subject "appears" establishs notability, that they aren't bare passing mentions like those currently in the article. Reywas92Talk 19:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Per nom. --KheeraAnda (talk) 20:49, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It's very close here, so I don't know which way to bend. --Integer • (talk) • (contribs) 20:57, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Not enough significant sources.--Spiedini (talk) 21:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * IDK, it is really hard to tell whether this meets notability guidelines. Overall, I can't come to a justifiable conclusion. --104.255.207.59 00:52, 15 January 2021 (UTC)