Talk:Keshia Thomas

Keshia
Keshia was in the picture. Nothing of her life is relevant outside of that event. All of this "content" details the event the picture captures which should really go down under the protest and not her own name. A black woman protected white supremacists: so what? White cops have been doing that for a very long time. Evan Carroll (talk) 18:24, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There are a few issues, however. The first is that we do not have an article on the event itself, otherwise a merge might be a reasonable outcome. The photograph is quite iconic, so it could potentially merit an article outside of the event itself. Another issue is that the article is titled after Thomas by default, as the photograph itself doesn't have a name as far as I am aware. Wikipedia titles need to be concise and titling it "Black woman protects alleged KKK supporter" would potentially be seen as too lengthy and bulk, especially when titling it after Thomas herself is a valid alternative. Also, Thomas has received coverage past the event itself, but that's more of an aside since her coverage relates to the iconic photograph. My basic point here is that there has been sustained coverage that has specifically focused on the photograph and on Thomas herself (as she was one of the subjects of the photograph), so there's a valid argument to be made for this topic passing notability guidelines. If there was an article on the overall event then this would become slightly questionable, but there isn't and I also need to note that the coverage for her in the late 90s is quite heavy - and there's still some coverage nowadays, which shows a depth of coverage. Now as far as the comment about white cops protecting people goes, that doesn't have any weight for or against notability, so be careful to make sure that your arguments are all based in policy. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:57, 21 February 2016 (UTC)