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. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 02:19, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Pinckney (American Civil War)

[edit]

[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)

Fails WP:GNG, with only one book jointly about him and another person. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Note for those doing their own review, sourcing is challenging due to him sharing the same name as his more famous relative Thomas Pinckney.Jo7hs2 (talk) 04:02, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The book mentioned in the nomination is Two Charlestonians at War, The Civil War Odysseys of a Lowcountry Aristocrat and a Black Abolitionist by Barbara L. Bellows, 2018, https://www.google.com/books/edition/Two_Charlestonians_at_War/xZdIDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0. This is clearly an in-depth, reliable source, so I won’t belabor that it’s clear evidence of notability, but what I will point out is that it received fairly significant review coverage, with quite a few journals running reviews (see for example https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/285/article/724906/summary, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26973703, https://academic.oup.com/jah/article-abstract/105/4/1026/5352864, https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA593432004&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00182370&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E51c5e84d, etc). While he doesn’t inherit notability from the coverage book, much of the coverage mentions him in at least some degree of detail.

He is also discussed in-depth in the book OF TIME AND THE CITY: CHARLESTON IN 1860, https://www-jstor-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/stable/41698073 pages 160-172, which recount his birth and family ties up on through to his military service.

He also had an in-depth piece in a 1916 article of Confederate Veteran. It’s not on our list of reliable sources, but it’s also not disclaimed as a reliable source. Regardless: https://books.google.com/books/about/Confederate_Veteran.html?id=ZEEOAAAAYAAJ

Apparently, his papers were significant enough to be in a special collection at UVA: https://ead.lib.virginia.edu/vivaxtf/view?docId=uva-sc/viu00739.xml And other materials of his are also preserved there, including his 1864 diary and “reminiscences of Thomas Pinckney of South Carolina who was captured, May 28, 1864, and was prisoner at Point Lookout, Maryland, and Fort Delaware, Delaware. The diary records interesting observations on Fort Delaware life, the experiences of the “Six Hundred,” and the falsification of war news. After August 13, the narrative is continuous with no daily entries. The last date recorded is December 14, 1864.” https://www.lva.virginia.gov/public/guides/civil-war/Record-Archives.htm Immortal Six Hundred being the group referenced. (Further sourcing confirming his inclusion in this group: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Minutes_of_the_Immortal_Six_Hundred_Society_1910).

Also, while notability is not inherited, his biographical information can be confirmed in a another book about the family of his relative Thomas Pinckney, https://www-jstor-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/stable/27571522.

I see at least three in-depth coverages, significant additional coverage of the book (half) about him suggesting some degree of buzz about it in academia, various additional corroborating sources, etc. Accordingly, what I’m seeing suggests satisfaction of Wikipedia:GNG and Wikipedia:BIO and I’m for keeping the article. Jo7hs2 (talk) 03:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:35, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: This subject does have the one book which directly details, but I'm not seeing much else applied or linked here which puts this past GNG. Reviews of the book don't normally count towards notability. The Bellows article linked is more than just bare mention; the subject and his brother are directly detailed for portions of four pages. Confederate Veteran fails independence. Obviously there's little exclusivity in being part of the "immortal" 600 Confederate prisoners, a bare mention in the the source listed (not independent, being a screed from an era in which the Lost Cause was strongly promoted). Unpublished material like papers and diaries don't normally confer any notability. So my source evaluation of User:Jo7hs2's list gives two sources directly detailing, and other stuff which contributes some detail. It's rare that an ACW junior officer gets their own article, and I came to this process with that preconception. It seems likely with all the available archives this subject will get later biographical development, but we don't do synthesis ourselves. BusterD (talk) 22:00, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning keep per the above. BD2412 T 21:19, 9 April 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.