Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theodore Marburg Jr.

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 keep. (non-admin closure) CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:26, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Theodore Marburg Jr.

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

I'm not seeing anything that makes him notable. No mention of what he pioneered in aviation (if he did), otherwise reads like a typical service veteran Gbawden (talk) 14:01, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Generally a New York Times obituary is the defacto mark of notability. --RAN (talk) 14:08, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:24, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. It seems his wartime service also included operating a recruiting station in the USA after his injury, and that he was the focus of a legal determination regarding the loss of citizenship of those who pledge allegiance to foreign forces. Some sources: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8].Icewhiz (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - passes V, NPOV, NOR, etc. Individual was a member of high society as the son of a prominent ambassador and his life was well covered in contemporary sources. Smmurphy^(Talk) 16:20, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- It sounds as if his loss of American citizenship was a cause celebre at the time, which should be sufficient to make him notable. His military service was probably not out of the ordinary. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:35, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - It is considerably more difficult to find sources on individuals before online media could push out a story in 10 minutes. Considering the sources Icewhiz found, I have to lean toward keeping.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep verifiable bio covered in reliable sources there is his details in print books too which I am not sure whether they're digitized now. — Ammarpad (talk) 06:48, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As mentioned, back in these days things weren't so easy to source. But there's enough here to work, combined with the fact that he was the direct cause/subject of a change in the citizenship requirements. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:36, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep His father is more famous, but there still seems to be enough sources to have written this short but informative article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:18, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. Agree with Peterkingiron above; with that said, borderline trivia. Not a reason to delete, but could use some expansion. Kierzek (talk) 13:45, 7 November 2017 (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.