Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glenn Murphy Jr.


 * 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.  Citi Cat   ♫ 02:15, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Glenn Murphy Jr.

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Individual was the subject of a prior AFD and deleted at that time. Since then, the only thing that has happened is a revelation that he was arrested but not charged with a sexual assault in 1998 and recently arrested on a similar charge. The bottom line (and sad commentary on society) is that there are hundreds if not thousands of sexual offenders arrested every day. Being arrested doesn't make them notable. Subject was a minor political activist before and resigned from the only office that even had a snowball's chance of making him notable, Chair of the Young Republicans. Montco 14:31, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N, which could be argued against, but really, it just doesn't work.  J- stan  Talk Contribs 16:49, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable per WP:BIO. WP:BLP also applies, "...it is not our job to be [...] the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives." --Malcolmxl5 17:13, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete He was a national Republican official, but did not hold public office, so this falls into allegations of misconduct by private individuals. Could be deleted based on WP:NOT and WP:BLP. Edison 18:24, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep While this entry might not stand on its own, it provides context and more in-depth information for other entries (e.g., Young Republicans).  This entry does not exist merely to make an allegation of misconduct by a private person nor to spread titillating claims.   This entry provides accurate, relevant information about leadership changes at an influential, important public organization, without cluttering or placing distractions on that organization's main entry page.  While the subject may be a private person and while the charges may be entirely personal, the leadership changes at a public organization are relevant and deserve full examination.  A separate entry for the subject is the best way to provide a full explanation of those leadership changes and their impact on public policy.  Glenn Murphy has earned an entry not because he got arrested, but because he worked for a public institution and resigned under circumstances that have implications for that organization, for electoral politics, and for an ongoing public policy debate.  There is no point providing information (i.e., the fact of leadership changes in the Young Republicans organization) if we cannot provide full information. We cannot and should not edit out relevant, true facts just because some people find them inconvenient or embarassing and others find them titillating or salacious.  As soon as Glenn Murphy's private problems resulted in leadership changes at the Young Republicans organization and sparked a debate about public policy, it became worthy of a full entry explaining the details of those changes and debates.  Additional note:  How is this entry any different from those for Mike Jones or Fawn Hall or Donna Rice or Divine Brown?  Really, I think that there is ample precedent for the validity of this entry.  Do any of the pro-deletion contributors want to explain why this entry is any different from the others I cited? Demesne Lord 19:02, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Clearly passes WP:N as the elected president of a major national political organization (Young Republicans) and an important local political figure (chair of the local Republican party) who is the subject of a scandal receiving significant news coverage from newspapers across the country (e.g.:, , , , , ).  Fireplace 19:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Addendum The AFD nom says that except for the sex scandal, nothing has happened since the previous successful AFD. That's incorrect: during the interim, Murphy was elected president of the Young Republicans. Fireplace 08:41, 12 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep The President of the Young Republicans would I think be notable in any case. But the article should be rewritten to simply provide the key information about the charge, not the details of the sex act in question. Unnecessary details of that sort in my opinion fall under BLP. If anyone wants them, they're in the sources.DGG (talk) 07:26, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep he is notable Harlowraman 05:40, 17 August 2007 (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.