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. The argument that Ambassadors are inherantly notable lacks a policy basis (DIPLOMATE states For the purposes of this guideline, ambassadorships are not considered international offices.) and but there is a wider meta consensus that BLPs require decent sourcing that manifestly does not appear to be the case. On that basis the policy based arguments are to delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:51, 29 June 2014 (UTC) reply

John Michael Owen Snodgrass (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

there is absolutely no inherent notability of ambassadors. Those wanting to show keep must show sources to demonstrate WP:BIO is met. All I could find is one line mentions confirming he was an ambassador LibStar ( talk) 14:28, 20 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete - I also could only find confirmation of his ambassadorship. Hence non-notable. Arfæst Ealdwrítere (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 19:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 19:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 19:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep. I believe that most permanent ambassadors are likely to be notable, and that notability should therefore be presumed. [1] discusses Snodgrass's experience as consul general in Israel. The index of [2] includes three references to Snodgrass. Author Tim Heald quotes him in [3]. This autobiography [4] has a chapter about Snodgrass. According to [5] he had a significant role in negotiating independence for Tuvalu. He also has references in numerous Who's Whos, although the notability of such is questionable. Pburka ( talk) 00:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I would hardly call this article in-depth coverage. It merely confirmed Snodgrass attended an event as a rep of the foreign office. LibStar ( talk) 03:14, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I will look at the other sources later but I do thank you for actually looking for sources unlike other keep voters. LibStar ( talk) 03:33, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply

I have looked at the other sources you've found, to be honest they're not in depth:

• According to [6] he had a significant role in negotiating independence for Tuvalu. really? All I found was is a small one line mention on p.74, in a 192 page document.
• This source merely confirms he was consul general and he explains the British presence in Jerusalem , rather than explaining his actual contribution, or anything biographical. LibStar ( talk) 14:29, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• " autobiography [4] has a chapter about Snodgrass" yes just a one page chapter . LibStar ( talk) 14:33, 21 June 2014 (UTC) reply
• Keep My personal view is that Ambassadors are notable enough to justify inclusion but frustratingly wikipedia doesn't have any specific guidelines vis a vis members of the diplomatic service (including UN permanent representatives). Some people (like me) think that Ambassadors and UN permanent representatives should be considered inherently notable, others argue they are just mouthpieces for national governments and have no real power. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 17:45, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
• Keep -- Ambassadors (and other heads of mission) are notable. More junior diplomats will normally not be. Peterkingiron ( talk) 18:34, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply

there is no inherent notability of ambassadors. LibStar ( talk) 23:33, 22 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep. Not only was he an ambassador (and I agree with Flaming Ferrari and Peterkingiron that ambassadors should be seen as inherently notable), but we have generally held that any recipient of a British honour of the level of CBE or above meets the requirements of WP:ANYBIO #1. He held the CMG, two grades above the CBE. He does also have an entry in Who Was Who. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 10:46, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 10:49, 23 June 2014 (UTC) reply

• Delete Delete unless enhanced. This lacks substance and needs more to be a worthwhile page. WP:BIO. sig1068 — Preceding undated comment added 00:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC) reply

  That's not a valid argument for deletion. This discussion isn't about the article, but about the topic. That it can be improved isn't relevant. Pburka ( talk) 02:19, 24 June 2014 (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.