Talk:James Darcy Lever

Notability

I suggest that this article does not meet the Wikipedia:Notability#Articles_not_satisfying_the_notability_guidelines. Being related to someone notable does not make someone --J3Mrs (talk) 16:13, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Disagree, James Darcy Lever was the brother in Lever Brothers Ltd. The company was not called Lever Ltd, it was Lever Brothers, this man was the brother and co-owner equal in the company to W.H Lever.--PL.-Snr (talk) 20:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

"James Lever never took a major part in running the business", your own words. Brother of famous businessman not notable in his own right.--J3Mrs (talk) 20:09, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

You have done nothing to establish notability other than slap a tag on an article I started.A google search finds nothing. Being someone's brother isn't good enough.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:47, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

A memorial window doesn't make him notable.--J3Mrs (talk) 22:50, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Notability

My position is that James Darcy Lever was a co-founder of Lever Brothers along with William Hesketh Lever, the two brothers company led to the formation of Unilever. I feel this is notability enough for existance of an article about him.--PL.-Snr (talk) 23:12, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

• Delete - Completely non notable, "James Lever never took a major part in running the business",(quote from article) Brother of famous businessman not notable in his own right. Rest of article is padding.--J3Mrs (talk) 23:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

• Delete - Does not appear to be sufficiently notable to meet the WP:Notability requirement. Rovington: Can you supply any additional sources that discuss JDL in more detail? Probably should use the AfD process to resolve this, not RfC. --Noleander (talk) 01:18, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

• keep - The other brother, article is a stub but could be interesting. MacQueens book has a lot about James. --Dmresearch (talk) 14:50, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment P144 "The vanishing man who dropped out of the narrative before the General Offices were even completed" Therefore not notable.--J3Mrs (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
• Delete. Can easily be mentioned in the article on his brother and the article on Lever Bros. Itsmejudith (talk) 22:00, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
• keep - Not good for information to be suppressed.--Adammq (talk) 18:03, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment That's a very interesting first edit on a very obscure non-notable topic, how very odd, bit like the other keep. --J3Mrs (talk) 19:05, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
• Keep. The Unilever brand and products, as well as the corporation itself, are extremely notable. Information about the corporation's original founders merits, by default, inclusion in Wikipedia. The article's stub-length is entirely adequate.-The Gnome (talk) 12:35, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose that James Darcy Lever be merged into Lever Brothers. I think that the content is of a reasonable size in which the merging of Lever Brothers will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. PL.-Snr (talk) 03:33, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Most of the article is padding, everything that needs to be said about him is already there unless you think the quote "The vanishing man who dropped out of the narrative before the General Offices were even completed" would be useful. The focus of the Lever Brothers article is the business, not who James Lever's parents were, where he lived or a memorial window. He is not notable so there is nothing to merge.--J3Mrs (talk) 07:13, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

I second the merger. Miraclewhipped224 (talk) 07:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)