Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dong yun yoon


 * 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. One could not be a human and not feel the pain for this individual. That there was news coverage is perfectly understandable, provided the sensational emotional impact of the story. However, that does not make this person the subject of ongoing notability. We say "notability is not temporary"; we often use that to counter arguments that because a person has not received new coverage lately, that their previously notable article should not be deleted. But in this case, use it as a litmus test: would this individual still be known (were it not for a wikipedia article), in say 5 or 10 years, based on the coverage he has received so far? WP:ONEEVENT addresses this concern well. The non-SPA wikipedians who responded to this AFD contributed to the clear consensus that this individual is not notable, at least not yet.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Dong yun yoon

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

This article is about a person who may not have achieved sufficient notability for inclusion. If he is notable, he may only be notable for one event. The article was originally problematic because it appeared to be written in an overtly sympathetic tone and gave an address for donations; this can be cleaned up. Richard Cavell (talk) 07:04, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. WP is not a memorial page, and this article is written as little more than a eulogy. DMacks (talk) 07:07, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, merge any useful references. This is the guy whose family was killed in the recent Miramar F-18 crash. As it stands, he's been the subject of many national/international news reports, because of his association with this incident. Depending on the resolution of the crash investigation, and any legal processes, it's possible that this person may gain further notability in the near future. I'm in agreement regarding cleaning up the sympathetic tone, though. For now, this is probably best covered in the existing article; if he gains notability, he may merit his own article later on. TheFeds 08:40, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like to point out Merge and delete. - Mgm|(talk) 22:42, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Closing admin comment: essay does not apply; editor said merge references, not content.  Jerry  delusional ¤ kangaroo 03:24, 22 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.   —PC78 (talk) 11:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. I would support keeping this article. In reading the original version, I agree that the address for letters/donations is not appropriate for Wikipedia.  But, this story is quite newsworthy and any article about the lone survivor will sound somewhat like a eulogy, though I think it's more than that. The original author was indeed unbiased when discussing all viewpoints about the media coverage of Mr. Yoon - some say enough, some say not enough.  I'd say clean up the technical aspects like the weblinks, but I'm ok with including it, particularly when I look at the myriad of "athletes" and "actors" that are very obscure and arguably not newsworthy themselves.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.8.233.211 (talk) 16:59, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — 70.8.233.211 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Merge into 2008 San Diego F/A-18 crash. The incident may be notable, but the person has no independent notability beyond that. PC78 (talk) 15:18, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: I read the entry and felt concern for the individual, however, it seems to be little less than what one would obtain in a family conversation or local newspaper. I am having difficulty in discovering the necessary source material or national importance for the individual. I noted the remark made by an unsigned editor in that there are far too many pieces on unimportant sports people. However by adding this piece it would only make two wrongs. Royalhistorian (talk) 08:41, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Agree with "Feds" above that legal matters would trigger even more interest, but if no legal action occurs, it's even more newsworthy due to this man's forgiving nature, sentiments aside. Agree the original entry was too sentimental - in fact I did the favor of eliminating the neighbor's comments.  But a separate article for Yoon should meet objective news criteria.  An F-18 crashing into a home is not an everyday occurrence, which is why it is newsworthy.  But, the comments by Yoon are also not an everyday occurrence, which is why Yoon himself is newsworthy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fluffybear (talk • contribs) 23:47, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — Fluffybear (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep (comments from original author): I thank you Richard for your insightful opinion and to all who have taken time out to comment on this topic.  Certainly I can understand the concerns of too much empathy.  However, I would support a separate article because Mr. Yoon himself has been newsworthy to a rather substantial degree.  I feel there is a difference between eulogizing versus admiring.  A simple google search would result in many intriguing links regarding the legal implications/potential blame, and his subsequent actions or lack of actions, which were so non-typical that they generated many news stories.  I would emphasize that many discussions are about him, not about the actual incident.  Such would not be the case if only the crash had taken place.  It was Mr. Yoon himself that generated such interest. Since Wikipedia is for the readership of society at large, I hope this article is kept to acknowledge the fact that, eulogies aside, so many people have indeed talked about Mr. Yoon, which is, after all, what makes him newsworthy.  I thank you all for this opportunity to discuss and for your consideration.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chillynight (talk • contribs) 03:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * — Chillynight (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Merge to Whpq (talk) 16:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge per Whpq and WP:1E. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:13, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Happy Holidays 01:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

— chillynight (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete There is nothing about him specifically that is notable. Oneevent is meant to apply in exactly this sort of circumstance, of someone being the victim of a tragic accident. I would not merge to the crash, because I have doubts of it being notable either. DGG (talk) 01:23, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete--for non-notability, one-eventness, memorial, etc. Drmies (talk) 04:03, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep (additional comments) : I would like to respond to the statements that this is not newsworthy due to being "one event." I feel that one event is indeed newsworthy, if the news picks it up and it generates...news.  Caylee Anthony is one event.  Many, many children are missing for horrible reasons, and very few ever make it to Wikipedia.  Why did Caylee Anthony make it?  Frankly, because for whatever reason, it became very newsworthy, and I certainly feel Caylee belongs in Wikipedia, whether fair or unfair to the myriad of other missing children.  How about John Ogonowski?  Does anyone know him?  He was one of the pilots in the 9-11 crashes, American Airlines.  He has an entry in Wikipedia.  So does Stephen Siller, one of the firemen, who did what many other firemen did. I have no problem with them being in Wikipedia, I think they should be.  My only argument is that if they are, then certainly, Dong Yun Yoon should be too.  There are many examples of far less notable one-time events, outside of 9-11 or Caylee Anthony: How about Allen Campbell - a trainer who was killed by an elephant (a one time event).  He has a wikipedia entry, and there is no "debate" going on about his entry.  I can list so many more.  People get "nominated" to appear on Wikipedia, because for some reason, somebody felt compelled to write an entry about them.  Not every fireman from 9-11 is in Wikipedia.  Why Siller?  Because somebody took the time to nominate him for Wikipedia.  I am not a friend, relative, acquaintance, or anything of that matter to Dong Yun Yoon.  He just happens to be very newsworthy to me, and certainly so many others, which is why this article should be kept.  The internet has allowed for more information to be available to the public, and Wikipedia is a direct result of the internet age.  Not everything is newsworthy to everyone, but Wikipedia allows for those differences to be recognized.  Sure, if a google search for "Dong Yun Yoon" resulted in "not found," I can see where an argument can be made.  But Dong Yun Yoon has, because of HIS actions, become newsworthy to many people, and this should be respected and acknowledged, not because of sympathy, but because he is newsworthy to them.Chillynight (talk) 18:54, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: the crash may have been notable but not a relative of persons who died who was not involved in the incident. 16x9 (talk) 01:36, 22 December 2008 (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.