Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacob McNeil

Jacob McNeil

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

Does not meet WP:GNG. While I appreciate McNeil's service in the Revolutionary War, not every soldier is notable, and these is nothing here to suggest he was. ubiquity (talk) 02:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. ubiquity (talk) 14:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. ubiquity (talk) 14:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ubiquity (talk) 14:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Actually, he is significant enough for an article. Although there are many articles about American Revolutionary people, almost all are officers, if not generals. There are few articles about enlisted soldiers from the war, and even fewer about enlisted Revolutionary spies. I have added links from other articles involving McNeil and the early exploration and development of western Virginia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hadden (talk • contribs) 08:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:13, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, few enlisted men had documentation of their service, especially on the Western frontier, or in dealing with Native American leaders such as Cornstalk. There are a number of resources refering to his service, and a modern component dealing with his grave site and other issues. He was significant in Western Virginia history, and West Virginia history. Hadden (talk) 21:30, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but except for the Roanoke Times article, which is about a girl and her scout troop, don't all the other references constitute original research? The point of our notability guidelines is to provide an objective way of determining notability, which is basically people are notable if qualified sources say they're notable. The resources produced for this article would thrill me if I were doing genealogical research on my family, but I am not convinced they prove the subject's notability. ubiquity (talk) 22:32, 17 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the article is almost entirely cited to primary sources, which do not help establish notability. This was the best I was able to find, mentioning the subject as a Revolutionary War soldier, but being mostly about the son: Floyd County. The subject does not meet GNG per available sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:45, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- Even if it is all true, I doubt whether the guard who tried to prevent the murder of a captured chief would be notable. He seems to have done little else of note. I guess that getting a land grant was routine for ex-soldiers. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]