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 no consensus, default to keep. Jayjg ^(talk) 04:52, 24 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Isaac D. Smith (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable military officer. No sources are provided, and despite some reasonable claims to notability in the article (the list of awards), I can't find any significant coverage in reliable sources. There doesn't in fact seem to be anything particularly remarkable about him. Robofish (talk) 22:52, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In light of the sources that have been found and added by User:Bearian, I think reasonable evidence of notability has been provided and no longer wish to see this article deleted. However, this AFD should be left open as others have expressed a desire to delete the article below. Robofish (talk) 00:25, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• I have no problem with this article being deleted. DocYako (talk) 01:33, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:25, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete - notability not established, no sources in two years. Seaphoto^Talk 05:36, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I think this noses over the threshold with the awards and other improvements by Bearian; still needs a lot of work in terms of career, and I would like to see the citations for the awards. Good work! Seaphoto^Talk 17:59, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak delete: unreferenced, and notability not firmly established. The Silver Star gives me pause, but then, there are no details on the circumstances (when, where, what, etc.), thus the weak in my !vote. The rest seems like your typical sernior officer. bahamut0013^words_deeds 11:29, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Admittedly, the article was terrible, but I have found several cites in about an hour. He was the same rank as Colin Powell in 1983, and later got his second star. He won a Silver Star; he wrote a major report about the education of army brats; and in 1989, his claims case became a precedent for the DOD. Keep per WP:HEY. Bearian (talk) 20:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I found more cites and copyedited the stub. Bearian (talk) 20:33, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at WP:MILPEOPLE, and I think he passes due to factors: 2. Were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times; or 3. Held a rank considered to be a flag or general officer, or their historical equivalents (does Major general count?); or 9. Were recognised by their peers as an authoritative source on military matters/writing. Bearian (talk) 20:47, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Silver Star is the 3rd highest award for valor (not 2nd), only awarded to him once, and isn't even referenced. Merely being a flag officer isn't enough when one considers the millions of flag officers that have been in the US military in recent years, especially since he lacks any kind of significant commands. He hasn't been recognized by anyone as any kind of source (the one report written isn't unique at all, typically general officers generate reports at the cyclic rate and are mostly written by thier staff anyway). All in all, despite the refs mentioning him in passing, he hasn't done anything notable in his career. bahamut0013^words_deeds 18:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:MILPEOPLE is an unadopted guideline and falls down precisely on this point: just because they were flag officers do not mean that they are notable. Buckshot06 (talk) 22:46, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, my interpretation is that flag officers are presumed notable. The sources attest to his notability. Maj. Gen. Smith was a trailblazer. Bearian (talk) 16:50, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. And trailblazer in what, exactly? Race? bahamut0013^words_deeds 18:24, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Gen. Smith got his second star before Gen. Powell got his. Bearian (talk) 22:21, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete non notable flag rank officer. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 09:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Sources in the article would seem to meet WP:N at this point. The citation from the Louisiana House of Representatives certainly counts as a RS independent of the subject as does the ROCKS link. The Silver star and notations in books pushes it over in my opinion... Hobit (talk) 17:25, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, largely as per Hobit. --j⚛e decker^talk 00:31, 24 June 2010 (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.