Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gwynno James

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. Maxim_(talk) 14:47, 15 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gwynno james

Google gets 36, which is worrying. Oh, and none of them are relevant anyway. αѕєηιηє ^t/_c 16:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Published author (published by the Church of Wales):
- - http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=oUyHAAAACAAJ&dq=%22Gwynno+James%22&ei=9bjSR5j5MpGgygTM68X7Dw
  - http://www.antiqbook.co.uk/boox/carm/45686.shtml
- He's also provided words for classical music works:
  - http://www.amazon.co.uk/Lazarus-cantata-baritone-soloists-orchestra/dp/B0000CXG10
  - Oxford University Press Catalogue - http://www.oup.co.uk/music/repprom/hoddinott/catalogue/
  - mention in journal literature - http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0027-4666%28196507%29106%3A1469%3C528%3ARFTP%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C&size=LARGE&origin=JSTOR-enlargePage
- Verifiable and significant.--Oldak Quill 16:15, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Prob. Delete He's the librettist of a definitely notable choral piece. The rub, however, is that nobody seems to care about that. Googling his name produces a scant three pages, and except for the collection of sermons (which is a bookstore listing) all of the meaningful hits are sellers of the sheet music for the piece in question. In fact it is difficult to establish that he is a cleric. Mangoe (talk) 23:43, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is difficult. There may be information published about him in printed press, though I don't know where to start. The lack of information available through Google may just reflect Google's biases and poor coverage of non-present niche topics. Obviously, if there are no references to use, only a very minimal article is possible from the few sources available (though I would say a minimal article is better than no article, particularly if a significant person has poor internet presence). --Oldak Quill 23:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a reasonable argument, except that Google very plainly shows a lot of notability both for the piece in question and its composer. At the moment the most we have is enough for no more than a brief appositive in discussion of the piece(s), and no more. Saying that there might be print sources-- well, there might, but there might not. I certainly couldn't come up with them, not on this side of the Atlantic. Mangoe (talk) 11:26, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also point out that his sermon collection (a slim thing at sixty-one pages) barely registers. I get two hits at used booksellers, and Amazon barely even knows that it exists. Mangoe (talk) 11:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. "One of the more considerable intellectuals of the Welsh Church" Phil Bridger (talk) 22:51, 10 March 2008 (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.