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 - every possible opinion has been voiced in the past eight days by respected editors, and since none can agree, neither can I. Copyvios have been removed. Send it back for editing and re-nominate or re-evaluate it in a few months if it's not improved. Bearian (talk) 20:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Tony Gilbert (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

No sources at all, no indication of importance, no third-party coverage. Seems to be a joke page... "recalled how silly he looked..." and/or an attack page, but G10 was declined. This article has none of the qualifications to remain on WP. — Timneu22 · talk 13:52, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think the phrasing you are construing as a mean joke sounds more like the fond recollections of a relative, which the username suggests the article's contributor (who is a new editor) may be. Assuming good faith on this one while I take a look for sources Gonzonoir (talk) 13:56, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oy. After all that, the article content appears to be a copyvio of http://www.grahamstevenson.me.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=221:tony-gilbert&catid=7:g&Itemid=108 . Sigh. So it's back to the CSD tag. (This isn't to say I don't think the subject is notable - no opinion on that yet) Gonzonoir (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• oy back, the article did borrow from other sources, and does contain some personal recollections. He was my father in law. I still believe that his inclusion on Wikipedia is the the benefit of the site, and I aim to improve the information the article contains over the comming months. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aslanp (talk • contribs) 14:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I have removed the copyright-infringing material. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no evidence at all of notability. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:40, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Userfy. Right now, this doesn't read very much like a standard encyclopedia biographical article. If this fellow is notable enough to sustain an article, it's probably through his positions in various left wing political organizations. Fighting in the Spanish Civil War, in WWII, and being a POW probably aren't in themselves enough to make him notable. He certainly led an interesting life. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 14:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, not at all likely to be notable. Nyttend (talk) 14:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - As the head of a political party. I favor the inclusion of political parties, their leaders, and their youth sections on the basis of per se notability. Admittedly, this is not backed up by written WP doctrine at this juncture; nevertheless, I believe the principle is sound for an encyclopedia to follow. This is absolutely not a joke or attack page, although it was definitely written by someone close to the subject, which is problematic. I particularly question whether the gravesite at Highgate "opposite Karl Marx" was still looking for a tenant in 1992. Regardless, this is an editing issue, not a notability issue, speaking from my perspective. —Carrite, Oct. 11, 2010.
  • Additional comment - I'm pretty sure I can get this fellow over the notability bar and am going to go to work on this. Please hold off with the DELETE votes for another couple hours pending substantial revision. Carrite (talk) 16:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Take your time; these discussions last about a week. — Timneu22 · talk 17:30, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • One thing I've learned thus far is that Gilbert's papers (together with those of his wife) are in the British National Archives. The listing is under his wife's name (she was a founding editor of the British Daily Worker and a political luminary in her own right), but they died in the same year and the material seems to have gone in together. This is not decisive in notability terms, obviously, but it seems to me indicative that there's a notability case to be made here. Carrite (talk) 18:01, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for {{rescue}} by the Article Rescue Squadron. SnottyWong ^spout 14:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:02, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to Movement for Colonial Freedom. Case for notability is borderline, but as he is primarily notable for his association with one notable organisation, that looks like the best home for the encyclopaedic information. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Google news search shows a lot of different people named "David Gilbert" so I'm not finding anything. Are any of his books notable? Google book search shows he was interviewed for a book once. Being in charge of an organization for 12 years, doesn't really make you notable. Dream Focus 11:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep sufficient sourcing for notability . DGG ( talk ) 23:46, 17 October 2010 (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.