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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Durie Osborn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

This person apparently served in the British army in the 1850s and commanded various detachments, and was notable for defeating a party of rebels at Tudhoorkee. But, it that really notable? I don't think WP has a place for an article about every single lieutenant who defeated someone in a war (say World War Two, or Iraq, or whatever) There doesn't appear to be a whole lot of sources for Osborn. The second part about him being a serious thinker on both religious and political topics is opinionated: "They are models of graceful treatment of a perplexing subject" BrianY (talk) 16:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The article needs to be wikified, and I agree that the second part of the article must be changed or removed. Nevertheless, Osborn's military career appears to be notable enough for inclusion, in my opinion. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 17:13, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me ask you something. How do you define a notable military career? BrianY (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first of all, typically subjects with notable military careers served as officers. Such is the case with Osborn, who eventually attained the rank of major (and then, apparently, the honorary rank of lieutenant colonel). Secondly, the subject must have commanded a significant number of troops in a significant military action. This is also true of Osborn, with his service in India. In addition, a subject's military career is often notable if the subject has been decorated with one or more medals for his service. Of course, none of these criteria are deal-breakers either way; they are simply my personal opinion as to notability, and I admit that they skew towards an inclusionist standpoint. Nevertheless, I feel that they altogether make Osborn a notable enough military figure for inclusion in Wikipedia, even if he wasn't a truly "major" figure in the military history of British India. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 18:34, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"He commanded a detachment of the 4th Punjaub infantry at the actions of Gungeree and Puttiallee" I admit I don't know much about Gungeree and Puttiallee. (they don't have WP articles though) That seems to be the infantry he commanded at a (major? minor? non-notable?) battle... BrianY (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this article uses many obsolete spellings for some very well known places. For example, Punjaub is Punjab; Puttiallee is Patiala; Oude is Oudh/Awadh, an older name for (roughly) Uttar Pradesh/Lucknow etc. A person more knowledgeable is the area may be able to associate the listed places and battles with their modern names. Abecedare (talk) 01:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. If it's notable enough for the Dictionary of National Biography... OrangeDog (talk • edits) 18:54, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Was going to delete, but as the above user has highlighted, if the individual has an ODNB entry, then it's highly likely he's notable. Skinny87 (talk) 17:19, 28 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep on the very well principal that anyone who gets a full entry in a highly selective national biography like the old or the new DNB is notable. They;re the better judge than we are. But all articles from the old really do need a check for updating. DGG ( talk ) 14:01, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. -- Abecedare (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep As has been noted an entry in the DNB clearly establishes notability. Also see the numerous hits on Google Books, including several books authred by Osborn; some of which are even in print ~140 years later! Article needs wikification, but is an obvious keep. Abecedare (talk) 01:00, 30 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep If he's notable enough for a print encyclopedia, he's notable enough for Wikipedia. Edward321 (talk) 03:11, 3 October 2009 (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.