Deletion of John J. Threston

Comment: per ,  and no indication of notability. What's with the concordance of Chaucer
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOTMEMORIAL)

Comment: While the author certainly has a conflict of interest and is likely on a genealogical bent, the subject meets  based on mentions in the Wilkes-Barre newspapers
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: No credible claim of encyclopedic notability in the first place ("justice of the peace" not being a role that gets a person into an encyclopedia). Furthermore, the sources that are being cited as real footnotes ''all'' claim the subject as the ''author'' of the reference, and we don't count "writing about yourself" as ''prima facie'' evidence of notability if that's the ''only'' sourcing you've got — and even if they actually were valid references which the author of this article just ''cited'' incorrectly, if ''all'' it took to pass GNG was getting your name into your own local newspaper two or three times then we'd have to keep a Wikipedia article about every person on earth who ever coordinated a church bake sale. GNG requires ''much'' more substantive coverage than has been shown here. Meanwhile, the sources that are just listed and not actually cited as footnotes largely seem to relate to the ''family'' genealogy and not to John Threston as an individual (as just one example out of many, "The Bishop of London's Commissary Court 1578-1588" couldn't possibly contain any content whatsoever about a person who wasn't even born until 1872 — and there's no way in bleeding hell that he's got one whit of coverage in a concordance to the works of Geoffrey Chaucer, either.) So passing  has ''not'' been properly demonstrated here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)