Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Joshua Packwood - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kinu (talk | contribs) at 23:17, 19 May 2008 (→Joshua Packwood: Response.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:17, 19 May 2008 by Kinu (talk | contribs) (→Joshua Packwood: Response.)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Joshua Packwood

Joshua Packwood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Claim to fame is being the first white valedictorian at Morehouse College. Does not appear notable, however, per WP:BIO. References exist, as this is probably all over the news at the moment, but Misplaced Pages is not Wikinews. Might be worth mentioning at Morehouse College, but no basis for standalone article at the moment. Kinu /c 07:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Speedy Keep - Why do other Wikipedians tolerate people who do this stupid deletion shit to articles just an hour old and that are still breaking stories? Ever heard of STUBS? Apparently not!
And this at "at the moment" stuff by the nominator totally gives away his/her shortsightedness and rush to judgment here!
Let's see: from WP:BIO, the subject must be "unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." Er, the first white valedictorian at a historically black college? Gimme a freakin' break -- yea, that's unusual, DUH!
When all sources say the person "made history", that's not "routine news coverage" as discussed at Misplaced Pages is not Wikinews - again, a big and well-deserved DUH! goes to the nominator here.
Sheesh! "Kinu" needs community censure, not support for this AfD.
Now go find something productive to do instead of tearing down the good faith work of others!
Daimerej (talk) 08:01, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Comment: Please discuss/debate on contents, not attacking other editor. Everybody has a right to nominate an article for deletion. Let us discuss whether this article stays or not based on Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines, okay? Being in AfD does not mean that this article is already going to be deleted. An administrator will decide later based on the consensus of this debate. Dekisugi (talk) 08:45, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Comment - Thanks for supporting me when my good faith efforts at contributing to Misplaced Pages were so very, very obviously and misguidedly attacked by User:Kinu. It is heartening to realize that people do not view all editor actions as on equal footing and warranted and rational, which -- of course, this is very obvious, and goes without saying -- by extension means something about the editors who take such actions. On the other hand, what you are saying reminds me of a numbbot who might say that anyone who brings false charges before a "court" is blameless, while assuring the person who is charged that there will be a just outcome from a nameless and faceless "judge". But a just court immediately throws out and does not even listen to drummed up false charges, and a failure to do this right away gives no assurance to the person falsely charged. Quite the opposite, in fact. Daimerej (talk) 09:09, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I'll let the community speak for the legitimacy of my actions. Seeing has no one has jumped on the bandwagon to censure me, it looks like my nomination was made in good faith after all. I have no vested interest in the article itself, per se, so I will defer to consensus from this discussion, as is the case with every AfD. From the looks of things, it looks like there is plenty of discussion to be had. As for your personal attacks, I see no reason to humor them... sticks and stones. --Kinu /c 23:14, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. First, a note to Daimerej: please remember WP:CIVIL. There is no need to resort to bad language. Second, the nomination is very misguided. The person is clearly notable per WP:BIO. In-depth biographical coverage exists by multiple independent reliable sources. Apart from those listed in the article, there are lots more. GoogleNews gives 206 hits. The core requirement of WP:BIO is: "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject". There is no doubt that this requirement is met here. Also, the nomination is misapplying WP:NOT#NEWS. This is not a WP:BLP1E case either (although there one could perhaps make a stronger argument). Both are talking about the situations where the only reason the individual is mentioned is where a particular event is covered. Here, the newscoverage is primarily of the individual, not the event. If not for him, there certainly would not be such massive newscoverage of the commemcement at Morehouse College in the first place. Plus, of course, in this case the coverage of the individual was specific, in-depth and detailed, not what WP:NOT#NEWS is talking about. Nsk92 (talk) 09:40, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:BLP1E. In addition, this person doesn't have inherent notability. His achievements have not been article-noteworthy, there's plenty of students with 4.0's. He happened to be to the person utilized to achieve a semi-notable event that is amply covered in Morehouse College#Modern history.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 16:07, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
I disagree. His notability comes not that from the fact that he is a valedictorian, but from the fact that he is the first white valedictorian at Morehouse, a top historically black college. E.g. this CNN story makes this very clear.You may think that this is not a good reason for notability but extensive press coverage says otherwise. BLP1E says: "Where a person is mentioned by name in a Misplaced Pages article about a larger subject, but remains of essentially low profile themselves, we should generally avoid having an article on them. ...In such cases, a redirect or merge are usually the better options. Cover the event, not the person." Do we really want to have a WP article called The first white valedictorian at Moreohouse, a top historically black college? Because that is the event here. Nsk92 (talk) 16:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
That event is at Morehouse College#Modern history. It can be stretched out there for all its worth. But the event doesn't need its own article, and the validictorian certaintly doen't need his own article. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:00, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Categories: