Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Crane

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 delete. -- Cirt (talk) 04:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Crane

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

No real notability asserted for this British lieutenant. Most of the already brief article is about an evacuation, not him. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 06:25, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Every single mention of him I can find on Google is a direct copy of the WP article. It is even quoted verbatim in Convicting: Webster's Quotations, Facts and Phrases. As far as I can see, the whole thing is based on one single mention of Thomas Crane in the book referenced in the article. In the absence of any other sources, it fails WP:BIO. As an aside, the comment at the bottom of the article about his alias seems highly dubious to me...--Korruski^Talk 14:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it smells hoaxy (although it is probably just a whiff of vandalism from the nickname) and fails WP:BIO. Eddie.willers (talk) 20:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:23, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now. The google books view of the mention in the one reference attests to his existence, but it is insufficient to tell whether this one reference supports any notability or draws on any other sources. Trove and the Australian Dictionary of Biography turn up pretty much nothing (which is usually a sign of a non-notable person). I'll check the copy of Punishment short of death: a history of the penal settlement at Norfolk Island in the Barr Smith Library the next time I have a chance (probably Monday) just to be sure, but at this point this looks like a comfortable delete. -- Lear's Fool 04:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've looked at the source, and the only mention of Crane in the entire book is a single sentence: "Lieutenant Thomas Crane of the 73rd Regiment was appointed 'caretaker' Commandant of Norfolk Island during its last year or two." This is attributed to a primary source in Australia's historical archives. This is the only mention to be found in a reliable source, and in no way indicates notability. -- Lear's Fool _sock 06:28, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While subject appears to have existed, sources show no more than that, with no indication of notability. Edward321 (talk) 02:10, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: coverage does not seem "significant" per WP:GNG. AustralianRupert (talk) 14:02, 30 November 2010 (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.