Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Ferris

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. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:09, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Ferris

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

It seems odd to say that an article about a person who lived in the 17th century isn't notable, but from what I can tell of this article, there was nothing notable about Ferris. This article is a mess of

WP:OR and non-encyclopedic tone. Citations provided do not appear to be reliable, are clearly passing mentions, and anyways aren't clear if they're the same person. It sounds like this article was written as part of a family tree project. FuriouslySerene (talk) 16:43, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. FuriouslySerene (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. FuriouslySerene (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 00:06, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete seems like a family member made a page about an ancestor. I can't find anything notable about the individual. The references just seem to establish the individual's existence, not why they are notable. Jab843 (talk) 18:25, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:25, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- Do we normally allow articles on the founders of settlements? In this case he seems to be one of several founders, from which I assume he is NN. Peterkingiron (talk) 19:07, 29 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:46, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: If the sources presented wouldn't be considered to pass a 20th century subject, then there's nothing about him being born in the 17th century that matters. Most of the sources fail IRS, and none provide "significant coverage" for the subject. Ravenswing 06:16, 4 December 2015 (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.