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. Randykitty (talk) 14:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fred H. Hale Sr. (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)

No independent notability besides this person's reaching an advanced age. His entries on the List of the verified oldest men and List of American supercentenarians are sufficient. — JFG ^talk 16:11, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - this man was the oldest man in the United States for a while and, for a time, the oldest man in the world, which surely confers on him some type of notability. Vorbee (talk) 17:47, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no notability guideline or policy that the "oldest x" is notable. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:07, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, the article spells out a number of things remarkable about him beyond the extraordinary longevity that ought to suffice in itself. LE (talk) 18:05, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is no notability guideline or policy that the "oldest x" is notable. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:07, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as the article basically says he lived and died. Nothing beyond routine coverage of him and, contrary to the votes above, staving off the Angel of Death longer than anyone else in an arbitrarily defined geographical area is not inherently notable. Reliable sources need to provide in-depth, detailed coverage of said occurrence, and that has rather plainly not happened with him. As an aside, the stuff about him being annoyed by slow drivers is up there for the most irrelevant filler material I've ever seen in these articles, which is truly saying something. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 18:50, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:53, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:54, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above. The question is whether Hale passes WP:GNG, not whether living to a certain age makes one notable (it does not). The sources do not indicate that the subject is notable by Wikipedia's standards.--TM 20:59, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is something seriously wrong with WP:GNG if it does not acknowledge that becoming oldest man in the world does make someone notable. LE (talk) 23:27, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When you become the oldest person in the world, only your age is notable, not your life and deeds. Besides, becoming the "oldest man" or "oldest woman" is not a title that you fight for or pass on to the next person, it's just a consequence of random statistics of life and death. As hundreds of people are now known to be over 110 and eagerly followed by a bunch of trackers, nobody is likely to remain the Oldest One for more than a few months; indeed we have seen cases where the "record holder" only lasted a few days in that spot. Hence treating this subject as a dynamic list is the most sensible approach for Wikipedia's purposes, which are not the same as those of Guinness World Records. — JFG ^talk 04:50, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Oldest man on earth is notable. Oldest man in one of 195 soreign states is not. -- Oisguad (talk) 20:19, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This article blatantly fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO1E, and WP:NOPAGE. There is no policy that the "oldest x" is notable and this article is packed with longevity fancruft like a list of claimed records (including oldest registered bee keeper!), first went surfing at 95 and drove a car until 108. His name, life dates, and nationality are best handled on the three lists they already reside on, as the only notable thing about this man was his age. This WP:PERMASTUB is not needed. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:07, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Not that I expect it will make any difference. As this is one of 16 AfDs for supercentenarians posted on the same day, it is not possible to research all of them. JFG says, "When you become the oldest person in the world, only your age is notable, not your life and deeds." Where is the policy that says that? That is treating all people of a certain age as exactly the same. They are not - they are individuals, some notable, some not - and some may be notable for things they do or attention they receive when they reach an advanced age. The details given of this man's life suggest that there may well be "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", but as that doesn't count because for a time he was the oldest man in the world, why bother researching it or trying to improve the article? RebeccaGreen (talk) 15:04, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/Redirect to appropriate list. Fails WP:GNG as coverage consists of either WP:ROUTINE obituaries or unreliable sources (I've removed the findagrave and alt.obituaries links). CommanderLinx (talk) 00:53, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Nom. Fails WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:19, 28 November 2018 (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.