149:
321:. Or rather, now that I've removed the unreliable source, there isn't really anything to merge, so just expand the "History" section of that article with the sources on Smith in Google Books (
48:. If we don't have reliable sourcing for the town being named after ghim then that make the claim OR and not suitable for a merge so the policy based argument is the deletion one.
143:
211:
110:
234:
83:
78:
362:
While it seems to me that that is the more likely explanation, it's unsourced. The claim that the locality is named after John Smith doesn't appear in
87:
70:
450:. If he's only known for allegedly founding that town, and that's we all we know about him, then the town's article is where we should cover it.
342:
The problem with that is that the article says the town was named after
Smithfield in London, not after a John Smith. Which is correct? --
164:
131:
194:
379:
370:
says it is named after Smith. (Nor does the book say it's named after
England's Smithfield, unless I didn't look hard enough.)
333:
17:
125:
462:
437:
416:
383:
357:
337:
304:
275:
249:
226:
203:
52:
121:
412:
477:
74:
36:
171:
476:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
447:
318:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
180:
Mis-titled article about a person not subject to significant personal coverage in multiple reliable sources
66:
58:
433:
428:
short of a time machine, I can't imagine how we could ever have enough material for a half-decent stub.
408:
300:
188:
137:
260:. Having a town named after you and being mentioned in early histories seems notable enough to me. --
375:
329:
157:
429:
245:
222:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
322:
397:
296:
285:
183:
350:
268:
453:
371:
325:
241:
218:
49:
104:
363:
343:
261:
400:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
288:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
366:, however, so my advice would be to put in the Smithfield article that
470:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
100:
96:
92:
156:
407:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
295:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
212:list of Rhode Island-related deletion discussions
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
480:). No further edits should be made to this page.
170:
8:
233:Note: This debate has been included in the
210:Note: This debate has been included in the
235:list of People-related deletion discussions
232:
209:
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
446:the town website's claim to
497:
463:05:40, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
438:03:23, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
417:15:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
384:13:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
358:10:31, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
338:05:23, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
313:Ehhh...on consideration,
305:00:08, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
53:07:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
473:Please do not modify it.
448:Smithfield, Rhode Island
319:Smithfield, Rhode Island
276:08:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
250:00:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
227:00:34, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
204:08:34, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
67:John Smith, the Miller
59:John Smith, the Miller
364:this extensive study
368:the town's website
44:The result was
461:
419:
307:
252:
238:
229:
215:
488:
475:
460:
458:
451:
406:
402:
355:
348:
324:, for example).
294:
290:
273:
266:
239:
216:
202:
199:
198:
191:
186:
175:
174:
160:
108:
90:
34:
496:
495:
491:
490:
489:
487:
486:
485:
484:
478:deletion review
471:
454:
452:
395:
351:
344:
283:
269:
262:
196:
195:
189:
184:
181:
117:
81:
65:
62:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
494:
492:
483:
482:
466:
465:
440:
422:
421:
420:
404:
403:
392:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
310:
309:
308:
292:
291:
280:
279:
278:
254:
253:
230:
178:
177:
114:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
493:
481:
479:
474:
468:
467:
464:
459:
457:
449:
445:
441:
439:
435:
431:
427:
424:
423:
418:
414:
410:
405:
401:
399:
394:
393:
385:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
360:
359:
356:
354:
349:
347:
341:
340:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
320:
316:
312:
311:
306:
302:
298:
293:
289:
287:
282:
281:
277:
274:
272:
267:
265:
259:
256:
255:
251:
247:
243:
236:
231:
228:
224:
220:
213:
208:
207:
206:
205:
200:
192:
187:
173:
169:
166:
163:
159:
155:
151:
148:
145:
142:
139:
136:
133:
130:
127:
123:
120:
119:Find sources:
115:
112:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
472:
469:
455:
443:
430:Stuartyeates
425:
396:
367:
353:(Discussion)
352:
345:
314:
284:
271:(Discussion)
270:
263:
257:
179:
167:
161:
153:
146:
140:
134:
128:
118:
45:
43:
31:
28:
297:Ron Ritzman
197:condominium
144:free images
456:Sandstein
409:T. Canens
372:Roscelese
326:Roscelese
242:• Gene93k
219:• Gene93k
398:Relisted
380:contribs
334:contribs
286:Relisted
185:Treasury
111:View log
150:WP refs
138:scholar
84:protect
79:history
50:Spartaz
426:Delete
122:Google
88:delete
46:delete
444:Merge
346:Bduke
315:merge
264:Bduke
165:JSTOR
126:books
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
434:talk
413:talk
376:talk
330:talk
301:talk
258:Keep
246:talk
223:talk
158:FENS
132:news
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
317:to
190:Tag
172:TWL
109:– (
436:)
415:)
382:)
378:⋅
336:)
332:⋅
303:)
248:)
240:—
237:.
225:)
217:—
214:.
201:─╢
182:╟─
152:)
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
442:'
432:(
411:(
374:(
328:(
299:(
244:(
221:(
193:►
176:)
168:·
162:·
154:·
147:·
141:·
135:·
129:·
124:(
116:(
113:)
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.