Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Hernandez (intern)


 * 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   no consensus. Pax:Vobiscum (talk) 18:00, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Hernandez (intern)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Notable for actions during one event, the 2011 Tucson shooting. While there has been several news articles about him after the shooting, there is nothing to indicate that in the future he will satisfy WP:BLP1E. Atmoz (talk) 22:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  KimChee (talk) 21:39, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – The "event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial and well-documented". In addition, there has been "persistent the coverage...in reliable sources."  Seven days after the shooting there is still coverage of the individual in major outlets.    ttonyb  (talk) 23:29, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This article fails WP:BLP1E; no evidence of notability. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 23:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete/redirect Unless Mr. Hernandez goes on to do something else notable, for the rest of time, the article will merely consist of his actions in this one event and the followup. There is nothing in this article that could not be covered in 2011 Tucson shooting. NW ( Talk ) 23:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per all of his coverage stemming from WP:BLP1E --Muboshgu (talk) 23:42, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete for now. While further events are possible, at this point he's not a particularly public figure and publishing personal information is inadvisable.  His actions during the event can be covered in the main article.  SDY (talk) 23:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. He seems to be an estimable young man, and will quite likely deserve a page in a few years, but for now it's WP:BLP1E. PhGustaf (talk) 00:34, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The guy saved the life of a U.S. congresswoman. That's a pretty significant and noteworthy accomplishment. The President of the United States was among those who gave a standing ovation for the guy. In terms of the pure essence of what constitutes "notability," it would be my hope that Wikipedia would recognize the value of such heroism. His page should be kept. HowiePerlman (talk) 07:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails BLP1E. If there's ever a second E, it can be considered when it happens. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:45, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 2011 Tucson shooting, although "delete" would be my second choice. The redirect is consistent with the essay at WP:1E, where persons famous for one event still get the "honor" (to the extent that having an article on Wikipedia is an honor of some sort) of having their name as a search term.  For that reason Christina Taylor Green, the little girl killed in the shooting, does not have her own article, but has a redirect to the event.  While I think that WP:BLP1E is often misunderstood, it is appropriate in those cases where there would be no recollection of the person except in the context of the event.  Mr. Hernandez is one of many heroes, and the lack of his own separate article does not detract from that in any way.  Mandsford 01:57, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Mandsford. I wouldn't be surprised if he gains notability, but for now, redirect as with CTG and similar search terms. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 02:39, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Pdonna's links, as well as other coverage, suggest that this person will not be keeping a low profile. Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 02:27, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Those links are still mostly focused on the shooting (BLP1E). If additional sources could be added to establish his notability in a separate topic (for example: his LGBT activism), that would strengthen the keep argument. KimChee (talk) 10:03, 19 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Agree with Mandsford. DS (talk) 04:43, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong delete/redirect Most obvious case of WP:BLP1E I have seen in 2011. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  20:11, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 2011 Tucson shooting -- he played a significant role in that event, but I don't think Wikipedia policy allows him to be the subject of a biographical article. Regent of the Seatopians (talk) 00:19, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect. With all due respect to Hernandez, any article about him will only be either about the part he played concerning the Tucson shootings, or padding, unless and until he does something else. Perhaps he will, but until then, the part he played is best described in the article about the event. AndyTheGrump (talk) 03:37, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per BLP1E, not redirect as it is unlikely someone will type "Daniel Hernandez (intern)" to search for this individual; an update of the disambiguation page for Daniel Hernández should be sufficient. He is mentioned by name for his actions in the main 2011 Tucson shooting article and may attain his own notability in the future, but alas, WP:CRYSTAL. KimChee (talk) 06:16, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - per Kim - Haymaker (talk) 19:02, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep – For the same reasons exposed by ttonyb. For consideration: how is this individual's one-time event on saving a member of Congress' life different from say that of Chesley Sullenberger? netk (talk) 6:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, BLP1E states "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." He's a teenage gay Mexican-American who saved the life of a US politician in a very high-profile event. He is also an activist. He is already being honored as a teen, as a gay American, as a Mexican-American and as an American hero. His case story has already been contrasted with that of Oliver Sipple. Here are some great sourcing that can help;
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * PBS Newshour coverage
 * 
 * — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pdonna (talk • contribs) 00:42, 19 January 2011 (UTC) — Pdonna (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Sipple was notable not so much for his heroics, but for the poor way he was treated afterwards. I guess in the grander scheme of things, the news also focuses now on crazed gunmen rather than the heroes that stop them.  In a year, we'll know whether Hernandez will remain a public figure, but at this point this just smacks of WP:RECENT.  SDY (talk) 02:10, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The comparisons to Sipple is that of a gay American hero. Sipple was not an activist where Hernandez is and he is certain to get even more attention. Also this case brings up many interesting contrasts; the gay angle when marriage is such a hotbutton issue, being Mexican-American in a state known for anti-immigration laws and that he's so young and yet openly gay. BLP1E warns to not focus bringing embarrassment to someone known for only one event, not for being a national hero. This is a human interest story that has already become front page news in the Spanish-language media as well as the Gay media and the above links talk about the person beyond the event. "WP:BLP1E should be applied only to biographies of low-profile individuals." (see Who_is_a_low_profile_individual) Pdonna (talk) 02:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * "Human interest story" is a huge red flag. With the 24 hr news operation, we could have articles on missing cats with multiple reliable sources.  Every article about the shooting mentions Loughner.  Maybe one in twenty mentions Hernandez.  He was not an integral part of the event, and while we respect and honor his actions, we can do that in the context of the article on the shooting.  SDY (talk) 04:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Human interest stories are what attract a readership to a media outlet. I wouldn't even have heard about this guy if the angles on him were presented as dry facts. They weren't, the LGBT press talks about his activism and speculates about his political career. The Spanish-language media takes a different spin about the Mexican-American hero. Etc. It is the job of the media workers to take a story and highlight the human interest aspects to attract humans to their brand. Possibly Hernandez is only mentioned in a fraction of the coverage about the entire event but that's because he was not the focus of the entire event. A lot of mainstream Time, CNN, PBS, NPR, Fox, LA Times, etc. Here's a few more; "ARIZONA SHOOTING: Daniel Hernandez goes from Giffords' intern to world hero", "Giffords intern handling sudden fame after speech", By TERRY TANG,Associated Press,, here's a passage,
 * ''"Since Wednesday night, Hernandez has given more than 200 interviews. Trying to walk into the medical center where Giffords is hospitalized or anywhere else, he is surrounded by throngs of well-wishers. Before the memorial, the biggest group Hernandez had ever addressed was about 30 people. "And even that I think is a bit of a stretch," Hernandez told The Associated Press. Hernandez said the whole event still seems unreal. He can't even remember exactly what he said Wedneday night. "I ended up throwing away the speech I was going to be giving moments before I went up on stage. I think it's really disingenuous to be doing anything other than speaking from the heart." Hernandez had been an intern with Giffords' office for all of five days when the shooting happened at a district meet-and-greet outside a supermarket. He also volunteered as a teenager for her 2008 congressional campaign.


 * Born in Tucson to parents of Mexican heritage, Hernandez grew up the oldest of three children. His parents taught him and his two sisters from a young age to give back. "My mom is like that. She has a big heart," younger sister Alma Hernandez said. "My dad always thinks about the community. He always wants to do better. He always told us we have to always go back to our community where we came from to help out." Their father is retired and their mother has a side business baking cakes. Hernandez's talent for public speaking was developed in high school, where he participated in academic decathlons, Junior Honor Society and student council. Besides interning for Giffords, Hernandez was appointed as a commissioner at large to the City of Tucson Commission on Gay, Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Issues. He plans to help the organization with education outreach on issues such as bullying.


 * C. Michael Woodward, co-chair of the commission, said Hernandez had a resume bigger than some candidates twice his age. "It was pretty clear he was a mover and a shaker long before any of this happened," Woodward said. "The real heroes are the ones who dedicate themselves to public service but that's what he's planning to do anyway. He just got his hero badge early.""


 * Here's a whole column noting his being Mexican-American, "What If Daniel Hernandez Was Undocumented?"
 * And a couple talking about the gay aspects, "Grace Under Fire" notes the comparison to Mark Bingham, "Does Sen. John McCain Owe Gay Servicemen an Apology?" delves into the loaded language and differing standards the US has for those who are openly gay. So there are plenty of sources that talk about Hernandez in depth and as a unique aspect to a huge tragic event where this material would likely not be as useful. And after 200 interviews BLP1E cannot apply, after dozens and dozens of media interviews, many covering background information on him having nothing to do with the event itself it would seem he has surpassed any concerns of notability and verifiability. Pdonna (talk) 03:06, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per sources above.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per BLP1E. sources above only confirm that this is a one event notability. LibStar (talk) 00:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 *  Weak Keep - the kudos of "Hero!" keep coming in -- from news media, President Obama, and now ethnic/gay news outlets. He is likely to end up on the "Best of 2011" lists, and eventually, a political career.  I am listing only a weak keep because all of what I wrote is possibly conjecture per WP:CRYSTAL. Bearian (talk) 18:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment He's a remarkable person, and I have no doubt he'll deserve an article soon enough. But, as you say, we don't base articles on "eventually".  We are not in a hurry here. PhGustaf (talk) 18:29, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * He's a city-wide commissioner, jointly appointed by Mayor and city council of Tucson, at the age of 20. I don't think he passes WP:POLITICIAN yet, but it's interesting. Bearian (talk) 18:37, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge I think this article should be merged, the proposal should be for merging into the 2011 Tucson shooting, not for deletion. Thanks --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 20:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * keep clearly notable.--195.84.40.131 (talk) 10:29, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The reliable source coverage isn't just about one event in which Hernandez played a role; the reliable source coverage that supports the topic meeting WP:GNG concern's Hernandez role in the event (which is different from "one event in which Hernandez played a role") and who he is as a person - his life - that lead him to taking the actions he did. The reliable sources cover Hernandez well beyond the shooting - they go into great details about his entire life. The shooting turned the light on Hernandez and the reliable sources chose to extensively cover Hernandez's life rather than limit it to his role in the shooting. That justifies a Wikipedia article on Hernandez. Keep per WP:GNG. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 06:10, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I am moving to a "keep" based on your argument, Uzma Gamal. Bearian (talk) 18:23, 22 January 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.