Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Dwight (died 1661)
a lot of mentions in very limited histories" = notable. This is a  article, not a  article, there is no audience requirement. Per , multiple instances of  in reliable sources means the person concerned should be presumed notable and I see nothing here to rebut that presumption. For whatever reason, this early settler appears to have had a number of instances of significant coverage in non-self-published books, even if we ignore the references that only give passing coverage to this man, or which were written by family members (and thus aren't independent of the subject), that still leaves these references https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BTI6rl97_pcC&pg=PA40&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=dwight&f=false 1 https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=v2sWAAAAYAAJ&pg=RA3-PA29&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=dwight&f=false 2 as as those discussed in the article but which I do not have access to (but which appear to contain a lot of information about the subject). Obviously Wiki is not a genealogy site or a family tree site, but this article does not take that form
— User:FOARP, 18:24, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BIO||WP:CORP||WP:BASIC||WP:SIGCOV (Wikipedia:Notability)