Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Updyke 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 delete. Vanamonde (talk) 13:24, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

Harvey Updyke Jr

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This individual is only known for a single act of vandalism. This is a clear case of WP:BLP1E. Although the event was a news story, the references are really about some trees, not the subject of this article. Gnome de plume (talk) 17:29, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per nom. Note  that there already is substantial section on the victims (deceased, sadly) at Auburn Tigers.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:34, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Auburn Tigers  Large amount of coverage and even appeared on 30 for 30 to discuss his actions.    GracefulRed (talk) 18:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP and WP:NOTNEWS, without redirection. A redirect would still serve to define this person by a single stupid act, which we shouldn't do per the spirit of WP:BLP. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:17, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Apparently he wanted to get caught GracefulRed (talk) 18:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * And that article gives the reason why we shouldn't define this person by this one action. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:20, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Almost everything starts with a single act. 9-11,  John Hinckley, lee harvey Oswald, Mark David Chapman, etc.  Updyke made news afterwards by appearing in several documentaries, made news repeatedly after this including 30 for 30, and has continued on to happily ride this act. [] GracefulRed (talk) 20:26, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination, per 86.17.222.157 and per WP:PERPETRATOR. The act may have received substantial coverage, but it all seems to have been news about the act, and speculation on why he did it, rather than about the man himself. Hinckley, Oswald and Chapman, on the other hand, all received substantial and lasting biographical coverage, and not just about the single acts that they're known for. Little Will (talk) 08:42, 13 September 2016 (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.