| Revision as of 14:32, 21 August 2020 editDjm-leighpark (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers24,518 edits Voting !delete← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:44, 21 August 2020 edit undoDjm-leighpark (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers24,518 edits Rejecting online description of book likely associated with hte author.Next edit → | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
| :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ]. ] (]) 12:02, 20 August 2020 (UTC)</small> | :<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ]. ] (]) 12:02, 20 August 2020 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''delete''': If Misplaced Pages is going to allow persons careering around with little purpose but to destroy peoples work then this article needs to be deleted .... as perhaps does wikipedia! ] (]) 14:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC) | *'''delete''': If Misplaced Pages is going to allow persons careering around with little purpose but to destroy peoples work then this article needs to be deleted .... as perhaps does wikipedia! ] (]) 14:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Comment''': Unfortuately the description of the book {Chacksfield,2003) easilyfound at is primary and somewhat puffy and not eligible.] (]) 14:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 14:44, 21 August 2020
Robert Coey
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Robert Coey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The subject does not meet inclusion or notability guidelines. WP:INDISCRIMINATE: "As explained in § Encyclopedic content above, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." The article makes no claim to anything that would be notable. Meets the lowest bar possible of multiple sources, but still fails the WP:SIGCOV portion of WP:GNG: the sources do not discuss the subject in depth. Same for WP:BASIC. A presumption is not a guarantee of notability and WP:BEFORE shows this is a perfectly ordinary person, certainly intelligent and hard working, but ordinary and not notable. // Timothy :: talk 20:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC) // Timothy :: talk 20:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 20:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 20:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Arguably one of the greatest Irish Railway Engineers, responsible for a large proportion of the locomotives that kept the Irish Railways going. Has the nom. actually read (Chacksfield, 2003) or at least even bothered to look it up ? This is going to be a nom. WP:TROUT. Djm-leighpark (talk) 20:55, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment I would also like to know how the OP verified that the sources do not provide significant coverage. None of the books seem to be available on Google Books or Internet Archive so it seems improbable that they were able to access them all. I would assume that a book titled The Coey/Cowie Brothers would have significant coverage of him; don't know about the others but I'd be inclined to AGF on a historical subject like this. Misplaced Pages's definition of notability isn't based on our own subjective opinion of a subject's accomplishments but on whether or not they have received coverage in reliable sources. Spicy (talk) 22:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Reply Yes I did look into this. He gets three mentions in Chacksfield, not significant coverage. The other sources give him mentions, not significant coverage. The references reflect this clearly. I also looked into him on Railroad enthusiast sites and he gets some mentions there as well, but he doesn't have the coverage you'd expect of "one of the greatest Irish Railway Engineers". The lack of significant coverage in the sources about his work is reflected in the lack of information about his work in the article. I think if he were "one of the greatest Irish Railway Engineers", you should mention that in the article, along with why he is considered so along with the sources. You actually barely mention any details about his work on locomotives (barely meaning you wrote one sentence), which I think (along with my BEFORE) also reflects the lack of information in sources. You wrote 825 characters about his family and education, but only 184 characters about his work on locomotives. There is more than four times more information about his family and education in the article, than there is about the work your notability claim rests on. His work barely gets mentioned. Why? Because the sources lack significant coverage. // Timothy :: talk 22:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- "You"? I didn't write the article. If you were able to access the sources online, would you mind linking to them here so that AfD participants can assess them? Thanks, Spicy (talk) 22:26, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- I was replying to Djm-leighpark. I started the reply before you posted your own. No I'm not going to post links to pirated copyrighted materials. It should be obvious from the references.
- Reply: Also note Robert Coey/Cowie is not mentioned in JSTOR, Taylor Francis, Open Edition, Sage or Project Muse. Although there is a "Robert Cowie" who is an expert on sea mollusks and another who is an expert on Late Medieval and Tudor archeology. This includes journals and magazines such as Railroad History, The Railway and Locomotive Historical Society Bulletin, Irish Historical Studies, The Irish Review and many more about Irish and Railroad history. Finally, the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography does not have a listing for him, but it does have one for "Cowie, Robert Isaac (1842–1874), physician and author". If he is notable, how could he have evaded notice? (fyi, you can access these sources from the Misplaced Pages Library). From this it appears he is probably not "one of the greatest Irish Railway Engineers", but just a good engineer, hard worker and ordinary person. // Timothy :: talk 22:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Reply specifically to Spicy. Since you strongly believe the sources provide evidence of notability and you've asked me to look at them, I'm assuming you have looked at them. Can you provide us any information from the sources that would back up the claim of notability that I may have missed? I've provided lots of evidence of my research, lets see some of yours. // Timothy :: talk 23:04, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying... yes, we shouldn't be posting links to pirated stuff. I didn't argue that the sources "provide evidence of notability", which is why I chose to comment instead of voting... just wanted to make sure that sources had been checked as they didn't seem easily accessible through the usual venues and some of the arguments in the nom seemed like they weren't necessarily based on the sources. May look into this more later. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Spicy, sorry for the harshness of my reply, it wasn't intended that way, but it came out that way. I didn't have access to an index (not sure if there is one), so a paper copy might reveal more. // Timothy :: talk 23:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- No problem, I realize my comments may have come off as harsh/ABF too. Spicy (talk) 23:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Spicy, sorry for the harshness of my reply, it wasn't intended that way, but it came out that way. I didn't have access to an index (not sure if there is one), so a paper copy might reveal more. // Timothy :: talk 23:22, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying... yes, we shouldn't be posting links to pirated stuff. I didn't argue that the sources "provide evidence of notability", which is why I chose to comment instead of voting... just wanted to make sure that sources had been checked as they didn't seem easily accessible through the usual venues and some of the arguments in the nom seemed like they weren't necessarily based on the sources. May look into this more later. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 23:09, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Reply Yes I did look into this. He gets three mentions in Chacksfield, not significant coverage. The other sources give him mentions, not significant coverage. The references reflect this clearly. I also looked into him on Railroad enthusiast sites and he gets some mentions there as well, but he doesn't have the coverage you'd expect of "one of the greatest Irish Railway Engineers". The lack of significant coverage in the sources about his work is reflected in the lack of information about his work in the article. I think if he were "one of the greatest Irish Railway Engineers", you should mention that in the article, along with why he is considered so along with the sources. You actually barely mention any details about his work on locomotives (barely meaning you wrote one sentence), which I think (along with my BEFORE) also reflects the lack of information in sources. You wrote 825 characters about his family and education, but only 184 characters about his work on locomotives. There is more than four times more information about his family and education in the article, than there is about the work your notability claim rests on. His work barely gets mentioned. Why? Because the sources lack significant coverage. // Timothy :: talk 22:23, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:02, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
- delete: If Misplaced Pages is going to allow persons careering around with little purpose but to destroy peoples work then this article needs to be deleted .... as perhaps does wikipedia! Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:32, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
- Comment: Unfortuately the description of the book {Chacksfield,2003) easilyfound at is primary and somewhat puffy and not eligible.Djm-leighpark (talk) 14:43, 21 August 2020 (UTC)