Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Dudley Fooshe
Self published does NOT automatically mean it isn't a reliable source, according to  because it isn't autobiographical or about a living person.  Also, being held in the Library of Congress doesn't hurt either, so the main criteria is if he could be considered an expert in the field, which multiple books would indicate so.  In this instance, the book would be considered a reliable source.  Also, there are over dozen newspaper articles from the 1930s written by James Dudley Fooshe that are verifiable.  The problem is you need to go to Georgia to verify them as it is a very old newspaper and they don't put articles from the 1930s online.  The fact that verification is hard does NOT mean it can't be verified, particularly with a subject this old:  it is expected.  I understand the arguements, but it is breaking down into "you would have to go to Georgia to verify, so delete it" which is NOT a valid reason to delete the article
— User:Pharmboy, 20:51, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)