George Faunce Whitcomb : Theroadislong ( talk ) 20:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Poetry and California .  Theroadislong ( talk ) 20:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – this article on a non-notable relative of the creator (part of a walled garden of his and his wife’s family and extended families.) DIFF to the tip of the iceberg [3] .  The subject of this article does not meet WP’s notability criteria per WP:GNG nor WP:NAUTHOR .  In a nutshell, he was born, attended Harvard, married, wrote some poems, presented a medal in honor of his mother to an undergrad student who wrote a poem, served in the army, divorced, remarried, then died.  None of which makes him notable.   The sourcing consists of a self-written autobiographic statement in a Harvard U alumni report (used 6 times); a piece in the Harvard U newsletter on the medal named after his mother (used twice); an unverifiable source; a source that does not mention him at all; a two-sentence mention in the Buffalo  Courier, and four of his own writings used as sources.  Fails WP:POET and WP:GNG .  Netherzone ( talk ) 00:01, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Passes WP:GNG , WP:SIGCOV , George Faunce Whitcomb was an American poet, known best for three books on poetry: Eagle Quills in 1919, Jewels Of Romance in 1922, and Serpent’s Credo in 1931.  The Buffalo Courier wrote: "EAGLE QUILLS is a book of poems by George Faunce Whitcomb, and which comes from the Cornhill company, Boston Mass. Short poems, sonnets and quatrains of varying theme and moods, and possessing a certain charm are offered for the reader's entertainment and show the author to be retrospective and serene in style and expression without stirring any particular depths. The Churchill Company, Boston, Mass." [1] Greg Henderson ( talk ) 00:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ "Reader's Guide" .  Buffalo Courier.  11 January 1920 .  Retrieved 18 April 2021 .  Comment - [4] does not count toward notability itself, but indicates a review of topic's work was reviewed by Boston Evening Transcript .   There's a 1919 review by American Poetry Magazine.  [5] .  Reedy's Mirror gave a very short but independent review.  [6] .   Evidently topic was noticed by the New York Times.  [7] .  That's a high indication there are more that haven't been digitized, but I'm not sure if it adds up enough to satisfy WP:AUTHOR #3.  78.26 ( spin me / revolutions ) 00:47, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - This article was created back in October 4, 2017‎.  Why is it coming up for nomination now?  It passed a review by other editors and sources are all WP:RS .  Greg Henderson ( talk ) 01:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks, sounds like a lot of coverage for his poems!  Greg Henderson ( talk ) 05:05, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Military ,  and Massachusetts .  Graywalls ( talk ) 20:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: The article creator's wishes notwithstanding, what "review by other editors" does he claim this article on a non-notable author had?   Why is it coming up for nomination now?   Because the nom gave the article that review, and found it lacking in significant coverage in reliable sources given to the subject.  Beyond that, it's carried notability tags for four years now that the article creator didn't particularly address beyond asking for the tags to be removed.   (And beyond that , there's the conflict of interest on Greg Henderson 's part.)  The depth of coverage is meager, and says almost nothing about the subject himself.  A handful of scanty reviews doesn't count: 0+0+0+0=0.  Ravenswing 03:42, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per strong arguments given above.  The creator put a lot of work into this loving family history profile and should publish it on their own website, but the article makes no claim whatsoever to notability by WP standards.  Llajwa ( talk ) 17:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Ravenswing's reasoning.  In addition to failing WP:POET and WP:GNG , Wikipedia is not a family history site.  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 15:20, 29 January 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete