799:
automatically notable. (Similar things are probably true of a great many business executives and others in what to most of us are not particularly interesting professions). The harm to WP is not these articles being here, but the standards to which they were done. And the harm from the
Louisana State Assemblymen is not that they're here, but the absurd amount of length and detail. Good concise sourced articles are needed, as well as notable subjects. Therefore,
612:: I find most of those stubby MP articles to be rather subsaline, as well. However, my problem with the article as it is now is that we have a list of labels, of awards, of ... names of things ... but no description of the things he did. We need flesh to hang on these skeletal prominences. It's rather like a
377:
they had on that village, quarries etc. However, I do mean a few words not swamping the page with their second cousins and their neighbours. In the meantime, I strongly suggest
Kittybrewster takes most of his pages into user space, to protect his work. Then perhaps the main space could be deleted -
616:
rather than a biography. I appreciate that there is a potential biography, but what I found most noxious about the biographies kittybrewster had written, or ones like it, rather, is that they were treating awards as accomplishments and favoring the all important
Valuable Award over the actions that
834:
No, because without huge amounts of in-depth research it's impossible to tell which of these articles are notable and which ones aren't, whereas AfD kicks people into actually proving notability rather than leaving the article alone. This is proved by this particular AfD, where the subject's main
636:
I see where Geogre is coming from, at present this is just a ghastly cringe making page full of award and titles and honours written by a relative, and in one instance referenced by a relative (I wish my family were so adoring) the remaining refs confirm his existence - so does a tombstone. I'm
776:
I'm amused by "potted biography." That is, indeed, the problem -- potted meats. Also, I should point out that promotions in the officer corps prior to 1900, at least, if not prior to 1950, could take place strictly due to money and family connections. In the 18th century, officer ranks were
688:), so he didn't win a free and fair election from a real district. He was in parliament a very short time. He was a peacetime general, and did not see any action (as an adult) except in the 'Plug-Drawing Riots'. So I'll go with 'delete', not seeing any sources that testify to important deeds.
798:
I think we could say a little more than that, I'd say indicated but not conclusively proves. Whether they got there by longevity, money, or family, they were in positions of responsibility. They at least had the public role of the member of a US state legislature--and such are considered
555:. I've filled out the article a bit more, and it turns out he was, in fact, Member of Parliament for the charming little rotten borough of Tregony for about a year, hence notable by our criteria as a member of a national legislature. The article's still not great, but getting there.
378:
to protect
Knowledge (XXG)'s reputation and standards - and allow Kittybrewster and a team of volunteers (any offers?) to bring the possibly notable up to standard without risk of being nominated here. To me, this seems a fair solution to what is becoming large wikipedia problem.
738:, get a grip of yourself - the only thing that makes this person notable is his two minute (shared) stint in the Houses of Parliment. It was not known that this person was an MP before the AfD (even if some editors above have altered their comments to make out that it was!)--
726:: I just don't believe these wanton AfDs. Here is a person who was a Member of Parliament, an extremely notable military individual, etc. Of course we should keep such a good potted biography on Knowledge (XXG) (regardless of surname - in answer to the nominator).
709:
Actually, I'd be wary of declaring general officers and flag officers to be generally notable. Many promotions to these ranks occurred on the basis of seniority long after the officer had gone off active duty and exercised no real prerogatives of generalship.
471:
Why not do what do do in other cases of borderline notability: merge into articles for the principal figures of the same generation--which is what the DNB often does, or write the article for a group of brothers, with redirects, as we do for middle schools?
583:
does this "filled out" version answer any fundamental questions (other than, "gee, what is the chronology of this person's life")? Persons like this often affect the world in some way, but I have no evidence that this particular person did.
372:
a few days ago. I just wonder if the
Woodford page would be the proper place to mention these all military officers who lived there rather than giving them pages of their own. Mentioning particularly the effects, as presumably
600:(politicians belonging to a national legislature). I freely admit that this is a defense rather more in the letter than the spirit of the guideline; although I'm happy to discuss the spirit in a forum more suited to it.
674:
in agreeing that all
Members of Parliament should be kept. I'd even consider a rule that we should keep all generals, because such a high rank indicates it might be possible to find sources for future expansion of the
444:
Presently lacks multiple reliable and independent references, since Mrs
Arbuthnot's "Memories of the Arbuthnots" clearly does not qualify. Perhaps additional independent and reliable references could be found .
596:
Well. I said "speedy" because I discovered that the subject of the article was, briefly, a Member of
Parliament, and even stubby articles on MPs have generally been kept as fulfilling
462:
103:
98:
883:
and only served for a year? Lack of a real district means that the post was awarded as a 'plum', possibly with the help of his father who was an MP of near-cabinet rank.
263:
130:
107:
567:: "Speedy?" Oh, well, someone is bound to say that, I suppose. The "filled out" article goes into agonizing detail about a military life and never once explains
90:
693:
The stories told about
Charles George James Arbuthnot in Mrs. A's "Memories" are mostly human-interest anecdotes. It's clear from her account that *his* father,
948:
This person has been the subject of published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. Therefore passes
895:
I did see that and I would agree that it was a plum position, but that point should be refered to in the article and is not a reason for deletion in itself.--
242:. Notable as an MP, an equerry and by virtue of the number of men under his command. Nevertheless could use expansion. There is no walled garden. -
457:
unless there is something in Smith's book. I do not feel the usual confidence that there is, because the article used as independent source in the
62:
94:
514:: I've found a source for the Equerry position that gels pretty well with the bio, but it only refers to him as "Colonel Arbuthnot".
17:
368:
on his
Northamptonshire Estate. That may or may not make him very notable, allthough I did fleetingly mention this when editing
67:
956:
949:
940:
923:- If being a MP makes one notable, being from a rotten borough is even more so ... only in a less-savory sort of way. Kudos to
915:
899:
887:
872:
852:
826:
809:
785:
771:
742:
730:
714:
701:
661:
641:
621:
604:
588:
559:
547:
532:
520:
490:
478:
449:
434:
418:
396:
382:
354:
342:
322:
307:
293:
272:
251:
228:
204:
177:
150:
72:
506:, and held positions in the courts of both King George III and Queen Victoria. The article has been updated to reflect this.
86:
78:
617:
changed the world. This is in addition to the fact that they never gave us biographies at all, but merely chronologies.
540:, notable for a number of reasons. Could do with expansion, but I didn't think we were in the business of deleting stubs.
971:
36:
461:
article did not contain a single word about him. There were other more notable Arbuthnot generals--see my comment in
411:
unless something is added to explain why this "general" of the 72nd Duke of Albany's own Highlanders is notable. --
284:. Sorry, this goes too far. "General" of a regiment, now a battalian of the Seaforth Highlanders, is not notability.
369:
970:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
499:
57:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
822:
247:
849:
768:
316:
a "random" army officer would, in terms of numbers, be much more likely to be a lieutenant than a general.
225:
201:
147:
503:
334:, almost making it into government isn't the same as actually doing so. Military career unremarkable. --
529:
458:
289:
936:
52:
49:
818:
339:
243:
755:
515:
841:
760:
727:
694:
393:
351:
217:
193:
160:
139:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
739:
544:
597:
896:
884:
869:
698:
685:
431:
415:
285:
170:
817:. All of which argues for a speedy improve tag or something similar rather than afd.. -
953:
932:
880:
681:
658:
912:
638:
379:
335:
364:: Allthough it does not mention it this man was one of the first people to quarry
124:
637:
sure some of these honours were deserved - but can we all be let into the secret
782:
711:
671:
618:
601:
585:
556:
541:
517:
507:
487:
446:
392:: It is not a "large Knowledge (XXG) problem". You seem intent on making it so.
304:
879:
Yes, an MP, but did you see in the above discussion that he was elected from a
428:
412:
269:
165:
579:
is someone outside of the estates seeing the name and needing knowledge?
804:
474:
365:
318:
575:
is a general reader hearing of this person and wanting information?
374:
427:- a clear keep, following recent additions. Well done everyone. --
777:
explicitly purchased. Therefore, I would say that, at most, these
964:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
781:
toward something, but they are not themselves anything at all.
463:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/John_Alves_Arbuthnot
120:
116:
112:
911:
Plum position or not, former MPs are still notable.
350:: "Military career unremarkable"? Are you serious?
137:Another NN military person from the walled garden.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
974:). No further edits should be made to this page.
680:. OK, I see the point. He was an MP, but from a
215:Yes, that's exactly what I was pointing out.
8:
159:, another copyright violation, this time of
835:(only?) claim to notability, being an MP,
262:: This debate has been included in the
684:(perhaps one of those abolished by the
754:this article before the AfD started??
657:after the expansion and improvement.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
837:wasn't even mentioned in the article
950:Knowledge (XXG):Notability (people)
868:Notable as a former MP of the UK.--
528:- notable army officer and equerry
264:list of Military-related deletions
24:
465:Once again, nothing in DNB or GS.
571:this person is encyclopedic.
208:that is a mirror of wikipedia.
87:Charles George James Arbuthnot
79:Charles George James Arbuthnot
1:
697:, was a more important man.
303:Another random army officer.
48:with the added references.
991:
510:04:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
370:Woodford, Northamptonshire
967:Please do not modify it.
957:19:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
941:16:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
916:02:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
900:10:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
888:02:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
873:23:49, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
853:17:38, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
827:09:42, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
810:05:02, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
786:00:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
772:23:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
743:21:26, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
731:21:07, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
715:21:29, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
702:20:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
662:19:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
642:19:51, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
622:19:16, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
605:19:08, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
589:12:04, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
560:03:39, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
548:18:20, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
533:11:57, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
521:05:13, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
491:15:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
479:22:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
450:13:33, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
435:13:19, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
419:10:30, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
397:21:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
383:07:32, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
355:21:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
343:05:03, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
323:05:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
308:04:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
294:04:06, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
273:03:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
252:03:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
229:09:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
205:03:08, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
178:02:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
151:02:34, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
73:20:08, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
931:for the references! --
927:for the expansion and
750:, Wanton AfD? Did you
191:see above nomination.
459:John_Alves_Arbuthnot
686:Reform Bill of 1832
825:
695:Charles Arbuthnot
486:as non notable.
292:
267:
250:
982:
969:
847:
844:
821:
766:
763:
288:
282:Merge and Delete
258:
246:
223:
220:
199:
196:
176:
173:
168:
145:
142:
128:
110:
70:
65:
60:
55:
34:
990:
989:
985:
984:
983:
981:
980:
979:
978:
972:deletion review
965:
845:
842:
764:
761:
518:John Vandenberg
508:John Vandenberg
286:Septentrionalis
221:
218:
197:
194:
171:
166:
163:
143:
140:
101:
85:
82:
68:
63:
58:
53:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
988:
986:
977:
976:
960:
959:
943:
918:
905:
904:
903:
902:
881:rotten borough
876:
875:
862:
861:
860:
859:
858:
857:
856:
855:
819:Kittybrewster
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
788:
745:
720:
719:
718:
717:
690:
689:
682:rotten borough
670:. I join with
664:
651:
650:
649:
648:
647:
646:
645:
644:
627:
626:
625:
624:
607:
562:
550:
535:
523:
493:
481:
466:
452:
439:
438:
437:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
399:
359:
358:
357:
328:
327:
326:
325:
311:
310:
297:
296:
275:
255:
254:
244:Kittybrewster
236:
235:
234:
233:
232:
231:
210:
209:
181:
180:
135:
134:
81:
76:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
987:
975:
973:
968:
962:
961:
958:
955:
951:
947:
944:
942:
938:
934:
930:
929:Kittybrewster
926:
922:
919:
917:
914:
910:
907:
906:
901:
898:
894:
891:
890:
889:
886:
882:
878:
877:
874:
871:
867:
864:
863:
854:
851:
850:
848:
838:
833:
830:
829:
828:
824:
820:
816:
813:
812:
811:
808:
806:
802:
797:
796:
795:
794:
787:
784:
780:
775:
774:
773:
770:
769:
767:
757:
753:
749:
746:
744:
741:
737:
734:
733:
732:
729:
725:
722:
721:
716:
713:
708:
705:
704:
703:
700:
696:
692:
691:
687:
683:
679:
676:
673:
669:
665:
663:
660:
656:
653:
652:
643:
640:
635:
634:
633:
632:
631:
630:
629:
628:
623:
620:
615:
611:
608:
606:
603:
599:
595:
592:
591:
590:
587:
582:
578:
574:
570:
566:
563:
561:
558:
554:
551:
549:
546:
543:
539:
536:
534:
531:
527:
524:
522:
519:
516:
513:
509:
505:
501:
497:
494:
492:
489:
485:
482:
480:
477:
476:
470:
467:
464:
460:
456:
453:
451:
448:
443:
440:
436:
433:
430:
426:
423:
422:
421:
420:
417:
414:
410:
406:
405:
398:
395:
391:
388:
387:
386:
385:
384:
381:
376:
371:
367:
363:
360:
356:
353:
349:
346:
345:
344:
341:
337:
333:
330:
329:
324:
321:
320:
315:
314:
313:
312:
309:
306:
302:
299:
298:
295:
291:
287:
283:
279:
276:
274:
271:
265:
261:
257:
256:
253:
249:
245:
241:
238:
237:
230:
227:
226:
224:
214:
213:
212:
211:
207:
206:
203:
202:
200:
188:
185:
184:
183:
182:
179:
175:
174:
169:
161:
158:
157:Speedy delete
155:
154:
153:
152:
149:
148:
146:
132:
126:
122:
118:
114:
109:
105:
100:
96:
92:
88:
84:
83:
80:
77:
75:
74:
71:
66:
61:
56:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
966:
963:
945:
928:
924:
920:
908:
892:
865:
840:
836:
831:
814:
803:
800:
778:
759:
751:
747:
735:
728:David Lauder
723:
706:
677:
667:
666:
654:
613:
609:
593:
580:
576:
572:
568:
564:
552:
537:
525:
511:
495:
483:
473:
468:
454:
441:
424:
408:
407:
394:David Lauder
389:
361:
352:David Lauder
347:
331:
317:
300:
281:
277:
259:
239:
216:
192:
190:
186:
164:
156:
138:
136:
45:
43:
31:
28:
740:Vintagekits
553:Speedy keep
455:Weak delete
442:Weak delete
897:padraig3uk
885:EdJohnston
870:padraig3uk
843:Eliminator
762:Eliminator
699:EdJohnston
530:Astrotrain
469:Suggestion
290:PMAnderson
219:Eliminator
195:Eliminator
141:Eliminator
954:Greenshed
933:Kralizec!
659:JavaTenor
913:CJCurrie
756:WP:CIVIL
675:article.
504:regiment
366:Iron ore
336:Dhartung
131:View log
832:Comment
815:Comment
748:Comment
736:Comment
707:Comment
610:Comment
594:Comment
500:General
390:Comment
375:squires
348:Comment
187:Comment
104:protect
99:history
50:King of
925:Choess
823:(talk)
783:Geogre
712:Choess
678:Delete
672:Choess
619:Geogre
602:Choess
598:WP:BIO
586:Geogre
565:Delete
557:Choess
512:Update
488:Montco
484:Delete
447:Edison
432:(Talk)
416:(Talk)
409:Delete
362:Delete
332:Delete
305:Mangoe
301:Delete
278:Delete
248:(talk)
108:delete
893:Reply
801:Keep'
779:point
639:Giano
614:title
542:Leith
502:of a
429:ALoan
413:ALoan
380:Giano
270:Carom
189:No -
125:views
117:watch
113:links
16:<
946:Keep
937:talk
921:Keep
909:Keep
866:Keep
724:Keep
668:Keep
655:Keep
538:Keep
526:Keep
496:Keep
425:Keep
340:Talk
260:Note
240:Keep
121:logs
95:talk
91:edit
46:keep
805:DGG
752:see
581:How
577:Why
573:Why
569:why
498:.
475:DGG
319:DGG
280:or
268:--
266:.
167:KJS
129:– (
952:.
939:)
846:JR
839:.
765:JR
758:.
338:|
222:JR
198:JR
172:77
162:.
144:JR
123:|
119:|
115:|
111:|
106:|
102:|
97:|
93:|
935:(
807:'
545:p
133:)
127:)
89:(
69:♠
64:♣
59:♦
54:♥
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.