Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Howard Leslie Elliott

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) CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Howard Leslie Elliott

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

Lacks any singificant notability and doesn't really give any details about the person and is dependent on a sole source. BSOleader (talk) 00:26, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the 'sole source' is an official national dictionary of biography which includes the following secondary sources:
- - O'Connor, P. S. 'Protestants, Catholics and the New Zealand government, 1916--1918'. In W. P. Morrell: a tribute. Ed. G. A. Wood & P. S. O'Connor. Dunedin, 1973
  - O'Connor, P. S. 'Sectarian conflict in New Zealand, 1911--1920'. Political Science 19, No 1 (July 1967): 3--16
  - Who's who in New Zealand and the western Pacific, 1925. Masterton, 1924

That seems like quite enough to me. Stuartyeates (talk) 00:53, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 01:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Snow keep There have been dozens of previous cases where DNZB stubs have been put up for deletion, and they have all been kept. Community consensus is that being listed in the DNZB bestows inherent notability. Schwede 66 02:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's not 100% true. Barbara Weldon and Jessie Finnie both got deleted, but I rescued them to merge into Dictionary of New Zealand Biography. Stuartyeates (talk) 03:34, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They're in the other DNZB. J 947^{^{^{(c) (m)}}} 03:41, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, apart from the handful of representative entries, as explained in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography article. I was typing the above on my smartphone and couldn't be bothered mentioning the representative entries (and this one is obviously not one of them). Schwede 66 05:49, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Longstanding consensus has been that almost every entry in the first DNZB is considered to be automatically notable. J 947^{^{^{(c) (m)}}} 03:22, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Thank you for notifying the NZ wikiproject. I think there is enough here to demonstrate notability. The article could be improved, but that is not a reason for deletion. Mattlore (talk) 00:04, 14 September 2017 (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.