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. Possible cleanup can be discussed on the article's talk page. Randykitty (talk) 14:39, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vernon O. Johnson[edit]

Vernon O. Johnson (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)

Non-notable veteran. There's an assertion of importance with his world trips, but it falls short in verifiability. That's my main concern, that Johnson falls short of WP:BIO with the events of his life.

My secondary concern is that the article was created by JohnsonFamilyTheTrip, an account which appears to be promoting the book written about Johnson by an apparent family member. That takes it beyond just a non-notable biography into the realm of promotion. —C.Fred (talk) 15:44, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comments left on 00:52, 4 January 2015 (UTC). I have rethought my position, but since other editors favor deletion, I can't withdraw the nomination outright. —C.Fred (talk) 00:52, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The article is interesting, and from reading the article, I'm sure the book will also be an interesting read, but I don't see how having an interesting story to tell makes a person notable enough for an encyclopedia article. I also have some concerns about the promotional aspect here, so I agree with the observations that C.Fred has made above. Cmr08 (talk) 18:09, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. His wife's obituary is about all I could find. Fails WP:GNG and BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:48, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:11, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - as per nom Gbawden (talk) 07:15, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. — Joaquin008 ^(talk) 15:27, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Please reconsider inclusion, as issues have been addressed.

• Do not delete per nom. Over 40 citations have been added to the article per request, as well as photographs — Preceding unsigned comment added by JendaAJ (talk • contribs) 21:50, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, as the nominator, I still feel the article should be deleted. I've looked over the additions, and I do not feel that they show Johnson to be a notable person. —C.Fred (talk) 22:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. If this article is deleted, we probably need to go through the deletion process for the article on his spouse, Anne Beckwith Johnson, as well. —C.Fred (talk) 05:29, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I have nominated Anne Beckwith Johnson as well as her book Home is Where the Bus Is for deletion. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 17:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• ’Keep' per nom JendaAJ (talk) I believe that this article meets qualification for inclusion in Wikipedia. The inclusion of Mr. Johnson’s war experiences were not to say he was a notable military veteran, but it shows the evolution of what drives a man to undertake challenges in the face of global politics and culture of fear. Anyone who lived through the period of the Cold War would recognize that his opening of the Trans Siberian Railway to non-Soviet travel accomplished a near-unsurrmountable feat (aside from camping around the world for almost two years with 8 children). The argument about not being verifiable has been corrected by including citations to some of the 100 newspaper articles followed his life. His accomplishments were, indeed more significant than many of the sports stars and DJs that have been included in Wikipedia. I think that a thorough understanding of US-USSR relations in the 1950’s would make this clear. The book that resulted from this trip is also notable. Thank you.JendaAJ (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:44, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again, to be clear, as nominator, I still do not feel the article meets the inclusion criteria. —C.Fred (talk) 14:28, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Blow it up and start over - Johnson appears to have received significant coverage for more than one event (bus tour and political career), thus passes WP:GNG and WP:SINGLEEVENT. However, the current version of the article is so poorly referenced and non-neutral that I believe the best course of action would be for the article to be deleted and recreated, preferably by a user not connected to the subject. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or Move to draft namespace / Userfy - There are issues of WP:COI, WP:TONE, WP:UNDUE, and WP:V, but overall the subject appears notable and the problems don't appear problematic enough to merit WP:BLOWITUP. The same cannot be said for Anne Beckwith Johnson and Home is Where the Bus Is. @JendaAJ: - A suggestion: because it does not appear the latter two meet Wikipedia notability criteria (WP:BIO and WP:NBOOKS), consider merging the most important parts of them into this article -- or all three into a topic with a different scope. If most of the sources are about Vernon, the article title should probably remain, but if most of the sources are about the family bus trip, it's possible an article about that trip or about the family may be more appropriate (I don't know). Regardless, what really needs to happen is for you (or someone else, most likely) to take a critical eye to the text, trimming the fat and rewording to be neutral, limited to what is important and what is backed up by the sources. Things that jump out as particularly undue are things like Anne's involvement with the PTA and Vernon's time at Cadet School. Remove anything that's too glowingly positive (e.g. see WP:PEACOCK) -- these articles should be memorials but matter-of-fact encyclopedia articles. --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 18:46, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Could not find sources as per WP:GNG.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 22:23, 2 January 2015 (UTC) Keep as per Carrite (below), but agree the articles need substantial trimming.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 19:39, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Just one gander at THIS above the fold banner from the San Francisco Chronicle is more than sufficient to convince me that this is a GNG pass as the subject of significant, independently published coverage. Problems of tone are a normal editorial matter. Carrite (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Carrite's comment above. I think you're right, that probably there should be one article about the Johnson family and the trip. I suppose it makes the most sense for the article to be at this title. The book about the trip, etc., can be mentioned in this article, but I don't think they need stand-alone articles. —C.Fred (talk) 00:52, 4 January 2015 (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.