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.
No indication of notability of this publication is given in the article. The only source is findagrave.com and a search doesn't reveal any other sources.
Rusf10 (
talk) 01:20, 20 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep and tag for sourcing. This is an old time annual directory now used as a reference by historians and other researchers looking for info on 19th and early 20th century New York City building contractors. (Also note that Nom has a reputation, documented on his talk page, for bringing many articles to AfD inappropriately, PRODding others, and failing to follow
WP:BEFORE.)
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 18:47, 21 February 2018 (UTC)reply
WP:PERSONALATTACK by E.M. Gregory. To be fair maybe we should also note that his behavior at AfD has been the subject of multiple ANIs (but let's try to stay on topic). The article has been unsourced for over a decade, should we wait around another decade to see if sources magically appear?--
Rusf10 (
talk) 18:53, 21 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Yes
Rusf10 we can wait. Slow pace of development due to lack of magic is not a valid reason to delete. ~
Kvng (
talk) 23:49, 21 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Redirect to Walter O'Malley (no merge necessary, as the journal is already mentioned in Walter's article). Sport's Illustrated calls Subcontractors Register a "standard work" which suggests that it might be a useful search term. The periodical also gets passing mention in two places in Walter's biography:
https://books.google.com/books?id=-PwoDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA18&dq="Sub-contractors+Register". However, I don't see enough that would suggest a non-OR, NPOV article about it. One concern I have is if the other publisher, Joseph O'Malley, were to someday have an article, then it wouldn't be as obvious to have the redirect point to Walter. I suppose that may come about, but right now I don't see much info about this Joseph O'Malley. I'll point out that this Joseph O'Malley isn't the same as the Marquette philosophy professor Joseph James O'Malley whose writings are frequently referred to on google books (nor the same as
Joe O'Malley).
Smmurphy(
Talk) 21:26, 21 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete (or Redirect per
Smmurphy, above.Merge to
The Blue Book Network, per below) With literally no references cited in the article, and nothing that I could dig up, there is apparently is just the passing mentions in the bio mentioned above. Not nearly enough to pass WP:N.
references have been added.
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 11:45, 23 February 2018 (UTC)reply
I can't read the NYT refs because they are pay walled, but they are being used to support a paragraph about O'Mally and rather than about the topic of the article. So I am very skeptical that they provide significant coverage of the topic. The other source merely mentions the topic in passing, so does not established notability either.
YilloslimeTC 15:40, 23 February 2018 (UTC)reply
In fact I've gone ahead and removed the paragraph about O'Malley since it's off topic. Certainly relevant for a
Joseph O'Malley article, but not this one.
YilloslimeTC 16:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Because there were two O'Malleys involved, and because continues to be used as a somewhat widely cited reference work (on the New York building trades a century ago - the scholarly library I use holds a full set), and becasue it was issued annually over the course of decades, I think it makes more sense to keep it as a free standing article. Just tag it for sourcing and hope the next grad student coming to the page will add a source or two.)
E.M.Gregory (
talk) 11:45, 23 February 2018 (UTC)reply
None of the sources you added have any in-depth coverage of the subject. The book you added has only a single sentence mentioning the subject. You've only proved the subcontractors register existed, not its significance.--
Rusf10 (
talk) 15:46, 23 February 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep - I find it hard to beleive that a longstanding publication in a major metropolitan area does not meet notability guidelines. The obstacle here is going to the library and digging up the offline sources. ~
Kvng (
talk) 14:21, 26 February 2018 (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.