Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerald Blaine


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:44, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Gerald Blaine

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Gerald Blaine is a retired secret service agent who was involved in the protection of assassinated US president John Kennedy (JFK). The article's author has a potential (not confirmed) conflict of interest as an article writer due to his real-world connections to the book's release and to the sites which are being externally linked. (The article author would benefit from traffic to the stated pages.) The concerns are:


 * There isn't evidence the subject Gerald Blaine is notable personally. A search for him suggests that wider notice is mainly related to the release of the book ("Agent speaks out after 47 years", Amazon links, etc). Anything JFK-related hits the media to the point that Wikipedia is not indiscriminate is relevant. Likewise a book release on JFK is not enduring news. There isn't really evidence as far as I can find it for notability of the author Blaine himself - either as author or as agent.


 * There doesn't appear to be notability of the book either. Books on JFK's assassination do not usually get their own articles. They are usually used as sources for articles on the JFK killing.


 * JFK's killing and related conspiracy theories are cultural fascinations. They regularly lead to new books, and media coverage of the event is regularly rehashed; anything new almost automatically gets coverage. So there is a strong element of indiscriminate coverage (WP:NOT). WP:GNG requires coverage but makes clear that even wide coverage in reliable sources does not automatically imply notability. Per WP:NOT and WP:N, significant and enduring attention to the subject itself is part of the acid test. Again there isn't evidence of that so far.

FT2 (Talk 05:24, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Although I would agree that there are some COI issues because User:Vincebethel keeps promoting his book and blogs, the actual text of the document seems ok. It is all sourced to the new book, which has achieved some fame by being featured on C-SPAN's Q&A program with Brian Lamb (Gerald Blaine was one of the interviewees...see here). I don't know if C-SPAN coverage makes something notable or not (sometimes I feel like I'm the only one watching!). But I think the article is ok as long as the user's own sources are kept out. Johnnyt471 (talk) 06:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Is there actual evidence that Gerald Blaine himself has been the subject of significant attention by the wider world? (not just attracting media attention transiently as NOTNEWS due to his book release and mentions in passing as an agent in the case?) Also note WP:BLP1E issues, he may have only had attention due to being a non-core officer in an event where any person could have equally been in that officer's role. FT2 (Talk 14:39, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 23:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete He's mentioned in passing in 3 books I can find on JFK -- two by the same author! Appaently he's less than notable even for the one event. EEng (talk) 22:11, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Gerald Blaine was not even in Dallas on 11/22/63, thus his opinion is of no real merit. In that regard, it would serve a good purpose to delete this entry: it would take his ego down several notches: "see? you're a person of no noteworthiness." Please delete asapVincebethel (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * DeleteSince I was the one who initiated this article (yes, I wrote it!), I would like to quote Blaine in another context: I am issuing a "firm command" to delete this article- that is an order. Thanks, guys: sockpuppets rule (whatever those are). :O) Vincebethel (talk) 18:50, 30 December 2010 (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.