Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Sinclair Butt

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. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:07, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Sinclair Butt

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

I think this fails WP:BIO for notability but as this is the first article I've submitted to the AfD process I'll be glad to hear what other more experienced editors have to say. Mfbjr (talk) 17:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 20:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 20:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No indication of notability in any of the sources given, and from the sounds of his biography, it seems unlikely that any other sources exist that would demonstrate notability. Seeing as the article's creator is currently blocked, I'm going to assume that they were only interested in Butt for his surname. -IagoQnsi (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. An entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography is strong evidence of notability. Frickeg (talk) 02:20, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Frickeg. If kept, a hatnote should be added to a different Charles Butt. Clarityfiend (talk) 16:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Even after reading the article referenced by Frickeg I am not really sold on the subject's notability. But in cases where it's a close call, I tend to lean on the keep side of things. -Ad Orientem (talk) 21:42, 15 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.