Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Fields

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) Mediran (t • c) 10:18, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Fields

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Completely unsourced Biography. Does not have any WP:RS to back up any of the claims. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there are two book sources listed as refs that discuss him in some detail (the historical man, not the television character) and I found another book without much effort. I didn't look at regular GHits due to the TV series hits, but I'm sure that more references could be found. GregJackP Boomer! 05:09, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable as defined by WP:SOLDIER as a flag/general officer, with rank verified by RS.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 15:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, both book sources were added by me after the article's nomination -in an effort to see if the article can be saved. According to the first source, he was an infantry private during the American Civil War and he "promoted himself to General", thus the article doesn't meet the WP:SOLDIER criteria. Nimuaq (talk) 06:11, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, WP:SOLDIER is an essay, not policy. Fields still meets WP:GNG. GregJackP Boomer! 12:13, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, there is also this source, but it is self-published and I don't think it meets WP:RS: some of the claims there cannot be found elsewhere -eg. the source says that he served as a private in the 114th Infantry Regiment, and while there was a private named Samuel Fields in the 114th Infantry Regiment according to here, he died in 1888 while that self-published source indicates Samuel Fields was alive in 1889 and the first book source says the last record from him is from 1890. There are records of more than ten soldiers named Samuel Fields who served during the American Civil War (see here) and the self-published source might just took a guess. This doesn't mean there are no other sources that meet WP:RS, I think there are more reliable sources out there (like the first book source) but they are hard to find, so my vote is Weak Keep at the moment. Nimuaq (talk) 14:52, 14 January 2013 (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.