Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claude Jaffiol


 * 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   delete. Classic WP:BLP1E Fritzpoll (talk) 08:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Claude Jaffiol

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Not notable. WhiteCat (talk) 03:25, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Not all passengers who missed or didn't get on this flight will become notable.  This is ironic, not encyclopedic.     7   talk   03:31, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep This is ongoing news and created an outrage in France as the couple used their influence to gain a seat. Wisdomwiki (talk) 03:37, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: Keep comment above is from articles original author.   7   talk   22:54, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; this is news, not encyclopedic --mhking (talk) 03:42, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep ; They were closely related to the accident (more then others). If this would be a reason for deletion we might delete 50% of Wikipedia. Engerim (talk) 04:01, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Quit making up statistics and using WP:OTHERSTUFF. It's not helping your cause. Tavix | Talk  00:44, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete merits a paragraph in the AF 447 article Far Canal (talk) 04:26, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: If they are not notable persons already, then the fact that they missed an airline flight does not make then notable. This is worth, at most, two sentences within the AF447 article. Sacxpert (talk) 04:35, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect/Merge WP:BLP1E? Missing a flight, no matter how notable it may may be, does not merit an article. A sentence in the main AF447 article should be plenty as I see this has been mentioned in the media. Tavix | Talk  05:09, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete (no redirect either), two lines within the AF447 article would suffice, the rest of their story while interesting, isn't for an encyclopaedia. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 05:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Lots of people don't make it to flights at my work, and if something happens, they say they are not meant to be on there... But they won't say that if the plane made it to the destination without any problems. So I think's it's rubbish, it's personal feelings, and should not be a Wikipedia entry. Otherwise there would be lots of other stories - like 911, Earthquakes, flooding, car crash, Final Destination, Final Destination 2 (movies) etc etc. Yonny19 (talk) 07:57, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:ONEEVENT at best. Drawn Some (talk) 09:03, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Smerge a sentence or two into the article on the flight. No need for a full fledged article, but some mention wouldn't be out of line. Umbralcorax (talk) 16:36, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I wasn't on the flight either. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:46, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT, WP:ONEEVENT. So the guy got a brief mention for missing a flight that crashed.  Big deal. Resolute 18:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete through one-event and not news. The creation of this page was ridiculously inappropriate.  If the person proves notable several years later, it's fine to recreate it.  Don't create stuff like this right as events are unfolding...it's just very bad practice.  Cazort (talk)
 * Keep This man is a member of 2 medical academy in France, his wife is vice mayor of a major French city, he wrote several medical book and is university professor. It may not make him notable in the USA, but he's notable elsewhere. Instead of loosing your time deleting entry, try to find good data and contribute to pages.Steeven.eleven (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: In response to the new user comments from Steeven.eleven (created today, first and only edit is this AFD comment) I would like to point out the fact that his membership in the medical academy is only mentioned in passing (a fact of his job) and that his books are not discussed in this article. Furthremore, his wife doesn't make him notable.  If you can improve the article based on his notability (not that of his wife or of the flight he didn't get on) then please do so.     7   talk   02:27, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note Steeven.eleven (above) has been indefinitely blocked as a Sockpuppet of Unbordel (below) -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 06:16, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The article needs further improving of other topics related to this professor. I suggest to set it to stub instead. Unbordel (talk) 04:15, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: striking duplicate vote. Tavix | Talk  19:03, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Not a notable person.InfiniteHunter (talk) 00:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Cause if you delete it we will recreate it!!! Vive la France!!! Just kidding. Really the guy is not a small person in the french science world. You can search his name on Google. I think in english speaking countries he is not noteable but would you delete Marco Polo because of that? Jeromeplacec (talk) 14:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Marco Polo IS notable in English speaking countries. As with ChildofMidnight, I too didn't get on the plane, largely because I had not gone to Brazil in the first place. English speaking bias? Well, there doesn't appear to be an article about him on the French Wikipédia. He is listed in http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acad%C3%A9mie_nationale_de_m%C3%A9decine as one of the 130 membres titulaires, of whom only 19 have individual articles. As to his two listed (here) publications, I do not doubt they would be of value in the field of obesity and research therein. They are not in the generally notable category, so far as I can see. If they are decided to be, then we may expect a flood of articles based on every possible subject of scientific and medical research. Peridon (talk) 16:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

missed the plane, you could build a reasonable case for being psychic or something that may be notable. Paranormal is not inherently bad but post hoc selection bias and statistical inference problems come up in many fields and I think this is what is pushing notability in this case. Nostradamus maybe notable for missing a plane, especially since they didn't have any when he was alive LOL, but otherwise "stuff happens." Nerdseeksblonde (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I want to make room for everyone who got a lottery ticket that only missed by one number, or wore the same shirt as the first recovered body. Notability can't rest on superstition although if a passenger made a specific unusual claim about why he
 * Delete. Dozens of people miss every flight, or fail to book for it. Lucky, but not notable.--Dmol (talk) 21:56, 7 June 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.