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. j⚛e decker^talk 16:52, 2 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

James C. Bolton (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 article is 'filled out', but is based solely on one source (which can be found online here) and doesn't prove notability of subject. The article reads more like an obituary or a 'Who's Who' entry than an encyclopedia article. Attempts to find other sources online almost exclusively lead back to the library named for the subject. HOT WUK (talk) 19:34, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. HOT WUK (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. HOT WUK (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep -- I do not know Dictionary of Louisiana Biography, but I would suggest that a person selected for inclusion in such a work is notable. If notable there should be an article. The fact that the article relies on only one reliable source is no ground for deletion. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:02, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Only having one reliable source is definitely grounds for deletion, as one source is not sufficient to indicate notability. Also, inclusion in some dictionary of biographies doesn't necessarily indicate notability; I could publish my own dictionary of biographies and include myself, but that wouldn't make me notable. Moreover, dictionaries of biographies tend to include huge amounts of people who aren't really actually notable by Wikipedia's standards. -IagoQnsi (talk) 22:43, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable enough. Reads like a family bio. Kierzek (talk) 00:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - he appeared to be unknown outside of his locaity. Bearian (talk) 19:36, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:46, 23 April 2014 (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.