Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Abdulfarouk Umar Muttalab


 * 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 keep as it is obvious that this article is not going to be deleted any time soon. Take any merge/redirect discussions to the talk page, please. Tavix | Talk  20:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Abdulfarouk Umar Muttalab

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

The subject of the article does not satisfy notability requirements and should be redirected to the NW 253 page.  raseaC talk to me 23:11, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. That's like saying D. B. Cooper should be merged into whatever airplane he hijacked.  I'm not saying the article is currently encylopedia-quality, but it could be WP:BETTER and should be.  Edward Vielmetti (talk) 23:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. People who may become famous or infamous from a single famous act merit inclusion in the pantheon of persons who have, in any way, changed or created history. While they may be inextricably linked with their act(s), the people themselves necessarily have a noteworthiness worth spelling out.  Cesium_133 (talk) 07:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that while we're improving things, his father Umaru Mutallab's article should be improved. Edward Vielmetti (talk) 23:23, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect Yes, as he only caused a "disturbance" aboard the plane and no one was killed, I say redirect.  fetch  comms  ☛ 23:20, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I redirected Jasper Schuringa for the same reason but this one is far less cut and dried. Clearly a lot more information about him will come out as the story develops and there is almost certain to be a trial. If we get rid of the article now then we may well end up needing it again later. WP:ONEEVENT gives some examples of when people should and should not have articles. None of them fits this case perfectly but it feels like this is more like the examples which should have articles. Creation of the article may have been premature but, unless the story changes drastically over the next day or two, I see this as comparable to Richard Reid (shoe bomber). --DanielRigal (talk) 23:22, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep or Delete, treat the same as Richard Reid Happy Happy New Year (talk) 00:50, 27 December 2009 (UTC) — Happy Happy New Year (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep of course, this is already one of today's top search in Wikipedia. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, agreed with Happy Happy New Year; treat the article like Richard Reid ThreeOneFive (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, I agree with Happy Happy New Year et. al.; treat the article like Richard Reid; perhaps he'll become "Abdulfarouk Umar Muttalab (pants bomber)" Dr Smith (talk) 03:07, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete/Redirect there isn't a darn thing on this article that can't be cleanly kept in or isn't already on the main article. Reywas92 Talk 03:11, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep There is work to be done and events are still early. Deletion would be unwise or premature. Dheppens (talk) 03:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The Shoe Bomber got his own article apart from the incident he is known for, that sets a precedent. Erxnmedia (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect All information can be and is covered in the incident article. This isn't nearly the scale of the shoe bomber. Let's avoid this BLP POV fork, especially when his motivations are unclear. If he isn't even linked to al Qaeda he's just attacking alone and definetly cannot compare to others.  Grsz 11  05:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Northwest Airlines Flight 253, alot of the same information on both pages, other stuff existing should not come into play. This man may get a trial but until events unfold for now a redirect is best in order. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 06:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Shoe Bomber (or delete both) DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 06:35, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. That is an illogical and irrelevant argument.  Grsz 11  06:42, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep In the past Richard Reid was allowed to get an article. I believe that this is the same scenario. Currently we don't know that much about Muttalab, but as time goes on we would get more information. Any article that is under the media's eagle eye do not make a good AfD discussion. The Nidal Malik Hasan article, the Fort Hood shooter, was also taken to AfD, but was later allowed his own article. See that AfD for more information.  Lourie Pieterse  09:23, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. As more biographical information becomes available, readers will come here looking for a summary of it. There's no need to bury it in the article about the attack itself. We can merge them later if having two articles seems inappropriate. SlimVirgin  TALK  contribs 10:05, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per all the above keeps. Evidence is mounting that the authorities believe it likely that he had an al Qaeda connection, and an al Awlaki connection (the second being consistent w the Fort Hood bomber, etc.).--Epeefleche (talk) 12:05, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The situation should at least be allowed to develop, as more information will continue to come to light. - m - i - k - e - y - talk 12:09, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep As per all Keep comments :). --SkyWalker (talk) 12:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep He is suitably famous/infamous far beyond most single event BLPs. New bio details will come out, there may be a trial, and the media circus will certainly continue around him.  Let the flight article specifically cover the incident and this article the rest.  Joshdboz (talk) 12:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per above 92.20.111.198 (talk) 12:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge - for now; we don't let an article stay and then merge it, we merge it first. This guy is not yet enough for his own article imo, should be merged into the attack article.  ceran  thor 14:53, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep He is suitably famous, and terrorism needs to be covered, not ignored out of political correctness. Yaf (talk)
 * Comment Wikipedia isn't here to make known people who have done such things, we have WP:BLP that applies to even these types of people. This is a largely irrational and inappropriate reason to keep the article.  Grsz 11  16:26, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - per Joshdboz. This guy is already known, and will only become more widely known as the case develops.  More information and intelligence will surface about him, and this article would be the proper place to put it. People are getting a little too trigger-happy about deletionism around here. -- Eastlaw  talk ⁄ contribs 16:30, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Snowball keep. A merge is plausible but that is not what AfD is for. An article with this title needs to remain at a minimum since it is one of the most plausible direct ways to navigate to this event. Given the amount of coverage this is getting, it should be easy to sustain an article about the principal individual. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 15:13, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. This person will continue to accrue reported biographical data due to the high-profile nature of the crime, investigation, and its current significant and continuing changes to airline and airport security procedures. His background, motives, recent history and actions are extremely important to this significant event and should not be trimmed to avoid undue weight if it exists only within the Flight 253 article. The event is highly significant and the individual's role is highly significant, and so doesn't fall within WP:ONEEVENT. Revelian (talk) 16:39, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and Merge -Merge into the main article. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 16:46, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is nearly identical to the Richard Reid precedent in Wikipedia. Much more  biographical information about him is already accumulating in the public record about Abdulfarouk Umar Muttalab apart from the terrorism incident, so I don't need to repeat Revelian's points. For those urging delete or merge, a quick look at WP:SNOWBALL is advised. patsw (talk) 17:08, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep or alternatively Merge but do not delete per all precedents and what has been said above.--Centrism (talk) 17:40, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * KeepWikireader41 (talk) 17:47, 27 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:BIO Has significant 3rd party coverage, this individual will generate continued press for the next few years up until his trial and likely beyond.  RP459 (talk) 18:51, 27 December 2009 (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.