Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timothy Morris

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. The analysis of arguments and rationales lead to a delete conclusion, per detailed analysis provided below of the sourcing. Courcelles (talk) 15:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Timothy Morris

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Routine coverage here fails WP:GNG. Uhooep (talk) 16:37, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United Kingdom. Shellwood (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations and Morocco. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:47, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant coverage to meet WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 00:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This seems to be one of a number of drive-by nominations of British ambassadors. Coverage here is a little thin, but there is a nultiplicity of hits to news sources. The GNG is nothing to do with importance, so in theory an ambassador could prove to be non-notable, but thanks to the coverage they get in their international role from journalists and academics it would be hard for one to achieve such obscurity, especially when it comes to diplomacy in Israel. And what may be "routine coverage" for an ambassador is at a higher level than for less notable roles. The GNG gives this helpful definition: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Moonraker (talk) 13:42, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What has this to do with Israel? Currently the article is based on primary sources. LibStar (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of words, but no sources. // Timothy :: talk 05:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Moonraker, could you clarify your comments? Israel is mentioned nowhere in this debate, nor in the article under consideration. Thanks.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 16:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Randykitty, I don't understand Israel either, it must be a typo. On the point about primary sources, there is no harm in them for facts, but as with any British ambassador there is a mass of sources available. I have just spent about twenty minutes finding and adding a few. In my humble opinion, we need a less negative attitude to a significant group of people, who are far more likely to prove to be notable than not. I would only propose the deletion of any article if I had looked for good reliable sources and not been able to find any. Moonraker (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think I know what happened: there was another AfD for an ambassador to Israel, so this must have been a simple copy/paste error. No harm done. --Randykitty (talk) 17:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relisting in the light of the new sources added by Moonraker
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, $Salvio giuliano$ 19:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the added sources pass WP:GNG. Suonii180 (talk) 21:42, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG, BASIC, ANYBIO. No sources with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source eval:

1. "Latest news". webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk. Archived from the original on 1 September 2008. Retrieved 1 August 2017. Government archive website, no SIGCOV and fails IS.
2. ^ "Mr Tim Morris - GOV.UK". www.gov.uk. Retrieved 1 August 2017. Government website, fails IS
3. ^ Jump up to:a b c "Africa Programme UK Heads of Mission Series 2016: Ambassador to South Sudan, Timothy Morris" in Africa Programme UK Heads of Mission Series 2016 (Chatham House, July 2016), p. 18 Promotional material for a conference fails IS RS
4. ^ Jump up to:a b "Change of Her Majesty's Ambassador South Sudan - GOV.UK". www.gov.uk. Retrieved 1 August 2017. Government website, fails IS
5. ^ The Diplomatic Service List (1994), p. 258 Government website, fails IS
6. ^ "Mauretania" in Dod's Parliamentary Companion (2009), p. 1159 Listing with brief biography, contains all member of the civil service, is not a source for notability, no SIGCOV
7. ^ "April 2011", Royal web site, accessed 6 March 2023 Government website, fails IS
8. ^ "Peace now, “shape of country” later – UK", Eye Radio, 28 January 2016, accessed 6 March 2023 Interview, fails IS RS.
9. ^ "Change of Her Majesty's Ambassador to South Sudan: Alison Blackburne". GOV.UK. Retrieved 16 January 2021. Government website, fails IS
10. ^ "Morris, Timothy Colin, (born 17 Sept. 1958), HM Diplomatic Service, retired; Director, Tim Morris Consulting Ltd, since 2018", Who's Who, doi.org, 1 December 2022, accessed 6 March 2023 (subscription required) Who's Who listing is not a source for notability

Keep votes above have shown no refs with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV (ProQuest, JSTOR).

BLPs need clearly Ind RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notabilty to avoid abuse. // Timothy :: talk 05:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - as show by TimothyBlue, does not pass the WP:SIGCOV barrier.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 20:21, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: TimothyBlue's assessment seems correct. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 15:07, 20 March 2023 (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.