Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Greenwood (soldier)

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. I considered a redirect but the name as it is is an implausible search string. Tone 17:35, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Greenwood (soldier) (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)

Sounds like he had an interesting life, but didn't meet any aspect of WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Possibly worth a redirect to Tottenham Cemetery or Harry Greenwood as an WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 16:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:19, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:19, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DMySon 04:35, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • No idea what this means but it seems at least like a claim of significance to me: "he took part in royal ceremonies and stood guard at the lying in state of King Edward VII. "--Prisencolin (talk) 07:27, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'll assume that "he took part in royal ceremonies and stood guard at the lying in state of King Edward VII" is a credible claim of significance. But that does not mean the subject is notable: those criteria generally only apply to whether an article can be speedily deleted or not under WP:A7, WP:A9, or WP:A11. This dude fails both the general notability guidelines (WP:GNG) and the subject-specific ones at WP:NSOLDIER. In order for Charles to be notable, he must stand out, or distinguish himself from his unit (e.g. be the first member, or revolutionize the force, etc.) so that he gets significant coverage per the GNG. He has no uniqueness among the probably couple thousand of past and present Yeomen, or among the soldiers that stood guard at the lying-in-state. If those subjects are notable, articles should be made on Yeomen of the Guard and the ceremony of lying in state at Edward's death, but not a single individual involved in both. --Danre98(talk^contribs) 13:05, 15 July 2020 (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.