Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernard E. Gruenke

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. Davewild (talk) 17:54, 19 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard E. Gruenke

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

Keep to mind I tried improving the article with sources such as this and this but I then realized the subject may not actually be notable. The article has several issues and one of them is that there aren't many good sources; sometimes I'm not even sure what are about this man and his father Bernard O. Gruenke (distinguishing it with the "E." helps). Books found some results but either nothing significant or freely available and searches at News (only found one good link, the jsonline link above) and Newspapers Archive gave nothing significant and Highbeam also gave some results. At first, I thought he may be locally notable but without good sources, I'm not sure. SwisterTwister talk 05:13, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It sure does have issues. It uses "secular" and "non-secular" in reverse of their usual senses -- listing church properties as "secular" and public properties as "non-secular." Someone is taking civic religion too far, I think. If this artisan was involved in all of those projects, then it sounds like you're up against the distinction between prominence as notability again. It's certainly . . . lavish in its attention at this point. 11:59, 4 June 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hithladaeus (talk • contribs)
Delete - long list of awards, but unreferenced, and I don't think any are sufficient enough. All search results bring up news related to his father —Мандичка^YO 😜 15:14, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wisconsin-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:55, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On current evidence, there are sufficient sources to warrant a selective merge (probably a couple of sentences) to his father's article, where he does not currently seem to be mentioned - and almost certainly should be, given their relationship and very similar names. PWilkinson (talk) 00:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:08, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No reliable sources support any of the assertions. One reference merely lists the subject along with others. The other does not mention the subject.--Rpclod (talk) 12:07, 11 June 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.