Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ángel Juarbe, Jr.


 * 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.

The result was   redirect to Murder in Small Town X. Stifle (talk) 10:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Ángel Juarbe, Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable stub article. Victim of September 11 attacks but does not meet WP:NOTABILITY guidelines. Also, article falls under WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Nominating individually based upon earlier AFD.  Sottolacqua  (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think being a winner of a reality show is enough notability, independent of his role in 9/11. --Grev (talk) 20:37, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment–Winning a reality competition is would be considered WP:RECENT, is at best transient notability and is not criteria listed in the WP:NOTABILITY guidelines.  Sottolacqua  (talk) 20:42, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Murder in Small Town X. His name, to the extent that it is remembered at all, is an interesting bit of trivia.  While that may seem callous, it is more than most of us will be remembered for.  Mandsford 01:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Murder in Small Town X. Usually I'd say being a reality tv winner would be sufficient, but this was only a one-off, 8-episode summer filler show that got canceled after that one season.  Not exactly in the Survivor or the Amazing Race echelon here. Tarc (talk) 16:05, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Winning $250,000 on a reliable television show seen by millions and given coverage for this alone in the media, made him notable.  D r e a m Focus  02:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Murder in Small Town X. But we must all be careful not to set (bad) precedents by creating pages for those who would not normally be sufficiently notable save for the fact of their murders on 9/11. In this case there is something else (Murder in Small Town X) to justify a redirect and some mention. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 03:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep or Merge into a list of something like Victims of the September 11 attacks.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 03:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That would be a long list. There were over 2,600 in the World Trade Center, in addition to those in the planes and in the Pentagon. Mandsford 16:03, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * So what.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 20:37, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Response I'm glad you brought that up, Brewcrewer, because 9/11 is a major interest of mine-- I wish that there were historical wikis the way that there are entertainment wikis, where we could do articles about 9/11 and other events. I worked on making my own sortable database of the persons who died in the trade center, which I don't mind sharing, with info of what floor they were on, who their employer was, nationality, age, etc. and it's 2,627 names.  My feeling is that Wikipedia's rules would bar that as an article, however; our 9/11 articles include links to the legacy.com and other lists, which is the practice that substitutes for making our own lists of victims. I'm happy to discuss this further on my talk page. Mandsford 17:04, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, notability is not derived just from being a murder victim, even a 9/11 victim. So a category based solely on that would be unencyclopaedic and likely voted down in any AFD. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 22:17, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * It's not a category, but a list. An article subject must meet GNG standards, but not content within an article on a notable subject. So too with lists. The list has to be a notable list, but not the content within the list.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 22:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * A list, that's a horse of a different color. I thought you meant a category. My bad. I already posited (see the stricken section below) that "A list, maybe, but I am not sure." I am not 100% certain; it probably would be controversial and make for a spirited debate. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 23:10, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

* Almost 3000 were killed that day, so with all due respect, any category like Victims of the September 11 attacks should be a no go. A list, maybe, but I am not sure. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 17:08, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:MEMORIAL is not intended to prohibit articles on subjects who otherwise meet the GNG, even if the circumstances surrounding the death may generate a substantial share of the relevant coverage. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:54, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I would agree with that, but you would have to show that the WP:GNG is actually met in this case. Tarc (talk) 23:42, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.