Talk:Goodloe Sutton

Merger discussion

Goodloe Sutton doesn't meet the notability guidelines per WP:BIO. The recent coverage of Sutton's op-ed should be folded into larger article about The Democrat-Reporter.Megs (talk) 18:23, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for starting a discussion User:Megs. I happen to disagree. (That's why I created the article.) With regard to WP:BIO, it appears Sutton meets criterion 4(c) of WP:JOURNALIST. Thus the BBC quote I started the article with, to demonstrate significant contributions to the field. Thoughts? Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 00:34, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

I disagree this article should be merged. The subject was floated for a Pulitzer prize, did a large expose series on corruption, and is a newspaper editor, publisher, and owner. He also was placed in the University of Southern Mississippi's School of Mass Communication and Journalism Hall of Fame, and he won Auburn University's Journalism Advisory Council's Distinguished Community Journalist Award. I think he passes GNG for sure. --Kbabej (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

As it is there is too much duplication. I think the newspaper should be merged into the Goodloe article. deisenbe (talk) 18:07, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

The newspaper article must be preserved, regardless of the outcome of this merger discussion. Goodloe is not notable without the newspaper, but a local newspaper is still independently notable. SounderBruce 01:35, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

I disagree. The whole todo around Sutton is the big deal. He's the story, not the weekly small-town newspaper. As I see it anyway. deisenbe (talk) 10:04, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

• Revert this article to redirect to Democrat-Reporter. He is notable only for episodes in his editorship of the paper. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:30, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

I agree that this article should merge with the paper. And as to the reply above about weekly small-town newspapers, it is the newspaper of record for legal recognition of public notices. That makes that paper important. It also covers the surrounding locations. As to him being floated for Pulitzer prize, he didn't get any. The aging man will not outlive the paper. Does everyone who is nominated for a Pulitzer prize get a Wikipedia article. Merge Sutton with the newspaper is my view. P37307 (talk) 19:58, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

• Merge into the newspaper. This person is known for WP:1EVENT, which is best covered in the newspaper article. University awards are a dime a dozen (I've got one from my alma mater), and they do not make a person notable. -Zanhe (talk) 00:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

This person isn't known for one event. If that were the case, then there wouldn't be a 2015 USA Today article about him. I added to the article the sentence that "Jean passed away in 2003 after complications related to cancer, leaving Goodloe feeling "like a zombie" and not knowing "what to do", for several years afterwards" from that USA Today piece, to flesh out the biographical details. Why would we merge content and then by extension lose valuable biographical information like this from a person who (in my opinion) is notable and has a biography and deserves a biography? I think that the content between the two articles could be copy-edited and moved around/condensed somewhat to achieve an ideal newspaper article and an ideal biography. But I just don't see why we need to lose a biography when this person has plenty of recognition regarding his career and his contributions to that field (as it seems to me that he meets meets criterion 4(c) of WP:JOURNALIST.) Also, it appears you're understating his awards. Did you see all of them? They are mentioned in the article. Biosthmors (talk) pls notify me (i.e. {{U}}) while signing a reply, thx 21:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)