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. If more information becomes available that better shows notability , then an article can be started in draft space. DGG ( talk ) 09:59, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Horace George Victor Roberts (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)

Aside from being unsourced, the subject does not satisfy military notability guidelines because the Military Cross is not the United Kingdom's highest award. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:26, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Sources can be provided, usually with no problem. But why would the fact that his award not being the highest award be relevant for deletion? The Purple Heart is not the highest award in the US but if a soldier received it because he threw himself on a grenade, losing his life to protect the lives of fellow soldiers or civilians any less heroic? Just something to think about. Postcard Cathy (talk) 23:29, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - User:Postcard Cathy - That sounds like an issue for WP:WikiProject Military History. There are probably tens of thousands of acts of heroism in the armed forces of the world in a given year. We have to have a standard of who is and who is not notable. If the soldier in question received the Medal of Honor for the act mentioned above, he is notable and gets his article. We can change the guidelines, but, for now, they are the guidelines. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:11, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Ok, I get that. But for now, I would like put this discussion on hold to see if anyone can find out why the original editor thought he was wiki worthy, incorporate it in the article and source it for good measure. Postcard Cathy (talk) 03:48, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete in no way comes close to meeting our inclusion guidelines for military personnel.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:55, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Please consider this before passing judgement Hello, I'm the original author and very new to wikipedia (please don't hate!) H.G.V. Roberts in my opinion is wiki-worthy and I have a mountain of information I'm starting to publish - remember the information we are sourcing is dating back over 100 years. Not withstanding his Military Cross (which is the 3rd highest honor and on its own shouldn't preclude him from being considered notable according to wikipedia policy) he also received numerous other awards I'm currently researching for citations for in the London Gazette. Colonel Roberts served across both WW1 and WW2 and was the Commandant of the Small Arms and Mechanisation School, Ahmednagar, India during WW2. Colonel Roberts was killed during WW2 but the cause at this stage is still a mystery, we have a date but not a cause - we are still actively researching the events around his death. We have had confirmation from London that his WW1 service records were part of the famous 2-million records burnt in London during WW2 as a result of the bombing campaigns of Germany, however I have managed to track down some that survived and have a researcher in London at the National Archives assisting us as well. His WW2 records are classified as "secret" and we have applied to the Ministry of Defence in the UK to have them released, however this is a very lengthy process to go through and can take up to 18-months. Aside from his military career other points of interest worth noting is he studied Theology at Kings in London where he gained the Jelf Prize for Dogmatic Theology, Wordsworth Prize, and Barry Divinity Prize. Colonel Roberts originally wished to pursue a career in theology and aside from his studies he was a part-time member of the Territorial Army with the Middlesex Regiment. During his early years his father died of unknown causes. Following his Father's death and at the outbreak of WW1 he was mobilised from the Territorial Army for service in the Egyptian theatre of war, then served on the Western Front where he won his Military Cross as a Captain, followed by additional M.I.Ds awarded twice for action on the Western Front while attached to the Machine Gun Corps. Towards the end of the Great War he was Officer Commanding 40th and 30th Machine Gun Corps. The Machine Gun Corps was the foundation for the new mechanised fleet of moving heavy guns (tanks), and during his service with the the Machine Gun Corps Colonel Roberts helped pioneer the use of the early tanks and was a founding member of the Royal Tank Corps. During WW2 he served in various senior headquarter and officer-staff appointments for the Royal Tank Corps including Commander and his final posting at the time of his death was Commandant of the Small Arms and Mechanisation School, Ahmednagar, India. Can feedback please be provided here as to whether this person would meet wikipedia guidelines, I'd hate to go to all the effort of publishing a page, adding images, citations, awards etc. for it to just be deleted. I want to contribute to the community based on this research we are conducting on this Officer and the role he played across 2 World Wars but won't publish it on wikipedia if it's not welcomed. Thanks for your understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rwallace50546 (talk • contribs) 08:06, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete (A7) The General Notability Guidelines require Significant Coverage in Reliable Sources. Contrary to what people often say, it is not that difficult to find this sort of coverage - I've been able to locate reliable sources from the 1850s, after all - and the information would definitely be available from the WW1 & WW2 periods. I'm a member of the Military History WikiProject and I need to point out that there are strict notability criteria for Armed Forces Personnel - in this specific case, Horace Roberts would have needed to be at least Brigadier rank, or to have earned the Victoria Cross, to meet these guidelines but that can be overruled if it can be shown that the General Notability Guidelines are met. What I suggest is that you (straight away) copy this article to your Sandbox and continue to work on it there, and then submit it for review when you're finished. In its current form it's definitely eligible for Speedy Deletion and that can happen at any time without warning. The article doesn't mention a lot of key facts and it definitely will need citations and references (they don't have to be Online sources, they can be published books for example). As a further suggestion, once you've saved the article to your sandbox you might want to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history - you'd be able to post a request there for assistance with your article and I've always found the editors there to be very well-informed and helpful. Exemplo347 (talk) 08:11, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Please delete Thank you for explaining things. Now I understand the process better, I'll leave any page regarding H.G.V Roberts off wikipedia. There are many reliable sources that cite facts supporting what I have explained above and more (e.g. London Gazette, National Archives etc.), however it seems to me as though this could become an extremely bureaucratic and painful process to have anything published or agreed upon. I'll leave that to others as it's certainly not my domain of expertise.

Comment - don't be so hasty! Yes, it might seem bureaucratic & painful at times but with a bit of work, you should be able to produce a well-rounded article for submission. Don't give up at the first hurdle - I've had articles deleted before & I'm still here! Exemplo347 (talk) 08:33, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I second @Exemplo347's comments here. I notice that this is your first Wikipedia article and existing frequent editors, at least in principle, try to be supportive and welcoming. Major/Brevet Colonel Roberts almost certainly doesn't meet the criteria of distinction required for an article of his own unless your research at the MoD yields fruit that ultimately is published. (I note that the London Gazette states that Roberts went on half-pay while remaining employed in 1937, implicitly within the MoD, supporting your contention). While an M.C. is an award of great distinction, I note that fully half the majors in the R.T.C. in 1930 had been awarded an M.C. (though I fervently hope that neither of my sons is ever in a position to earn the equivalent of an M.C.). Furthermore, I could find no other coverage of the man in non-military sources that give any indiction of distinction. Anyway, please don't feel discouraged. Find another article idea, take a look at the WP:GNG guidelines, research your cited sources (which don't need to be online!) and start typing. For instance, you could add to the existing articles on the Royal Tank Corps of the inter-war years. Fiachra10003 (talk) 14:22, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete there needs to be significant coverage in reliable secondary sources for an article to meet the general notability guideline and have an article. At present this article has just one citation to a primary source. As a colonel awarded the Military Cross, he also falls short of WP:SOLDIER, as he was not a general officer, did not command a division or formation of similar size, and was not awarded his country's highest award (VC/GC) or receive multiple awards of the next highest (DSO?). By all means, keep looking for reliable secondary sources, but on face value, he doesn't meet the GNG. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:57, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. AustralianRupert (talk) 13:48, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I agree with Exemplo347 that if there is a basis for his notability, the article should be worked up in a sandbox before bringing it in to mainspace. As it is now, it doesn't seem to be even a close call. --Lineagegeek (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2016 (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.