Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/H R Fox

: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 no consensus to delete. After much-extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus to delete, and a reasonable argument that additional biographical data discovered over the course of the discussion buttresses the case for notability. BD2412 T 23:31, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

=[[:H R Fox]]=

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=H R Fox}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=H R Fox}})

No evidence subject meets WP:GNG. Hirolovesswords (talk) 10:08, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:29, 17 March 2022 (UTC)

  • Keep. The head of the railways in a country would seem to be notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:53, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:28, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete Although his position may give him a claim to notability, there are no sources to firmly establish that the subject is notable. Unless the sources that are currently cited can be shown to contain more than proof of the subject's existence, they don't count as SIGCOV. I have searched the Internet and every newspaper archive I have access to (ProQuest, Gale, Newspapers.com) and found absolutely nothing. There is one remaining source, which I can't access, that might help [https://doi.org/10.7227%2FTJTH.24.1.2], but that still wouldn't put it over the GNG. Toadspike (talk) 15:41, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

::Another editor gave me access to the above linked source, which does not mention the subject at all. This reinforces my opinion that deletion is the best course of action. Toadspike (talk) 15:53, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

  • Delete Subject does not pass GNG. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 18:52, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep Assuming it's the same person (as the first name doesn't match). Full name is Harold Robert Leslie Fox, he was [https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/37407/page/62 awarded a CBE in 1946], there was an article about him in the Railway Gazette of London in about 1950/1951 (which I can't find) but it is referred to in [https://archive.org/details/MIT-Technology-Review-1951-01/page/n67/mode/1up?q=fox MIT Technology Review 1951-01] which says he was also a captain in the Royal Engineers in WWI. He was described as a "trusted and true civil servant" in the [https://www.pressreader.com/jamaica/jamaica-gleaner/20160101/282063390942400 Daily Gleaner (Jamaica)] [https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/149267298/harold-robert_leslie-fox According to FindAGrave] he died 14 August 1951. There seems to be some newspaper articles at https://newspaperarchive.com/tags/?pci=4&pf=harold&pl=fox/ but I don't have access Piecesofuk (talk) 15:22, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Keep. Piecesofuk's detective work has uncovered a CBE, which if I recall correctly is considered to be "a well-known and significant award" for purposes of WP:ANYBIO #1. (I agree that it's the same person: there surely weren't two general managers of the Jamaican Government Railway in 1945 with names of the form H. R. Fox.) I'm generally hesitant to !vote keep when GNG-qualifying sources haven't been presented, but this is a case where the SNG pass allows us to infer that offline coverage (for instance, in mid-twentieth-century Jamaican newspapers that haven't been digitized) may nonetheless be available. See WP:NEXIST (editors should "consider the possibility of existent sources if none can be found by a search"). Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:48, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Good work indeed. Yes, a CBE has always been considered to meet WP:ANYBIO #1. See here to illustrate very clear consensus on this matter. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 09:07, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.