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. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:52, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Clarence Pillsbury[edit]

Arthur Clarence Pillsbury (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)

This is a bit of a difficult case. This is nearly completely uncited, and searching seems to show that the only actual source is, in the end, Melinda Pillsbury-Foster, for whom the article serves as something of a coatrack. The only source that gives any evidence of independence is the exhibit leaflet, and the evidence is reasonably good that its source is Pillsbury-Foster. Pillsbury himself seems to be a real person, but I don't see good evidence that he took the photographs that are attributed to him, and that's the basis for the claim to his notability. The text of the article was added into two places in 2005 through an IP that is now blocked as a proxy, with one addition from User:JohnClarknew much later which I think is innocent but perhaps bespeaks a friendship with Pillsbury-Foster; at any rate I don't think he intended any malice. In the end I think we need to back away from this until more plainly reliable sources are forthcoming, because at the moment there's sufficient reason to suspect that we are being used to push a hoax. Mangoe (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:43, 12 July 2013 (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.