Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry Klein’s 2006 Islamophobia Radio Parody


 * 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.  Majorly  ( Talk ) 18:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Jerry Klein’s 2006 Islamophobia Radio Parody

 * — (View AfD)

Reason the page should be deleted: This article is not suitable for Wikipedia. It is a long description of a single politically motivated talk show segment. The decription combined with the reply from an advocacy organization turn Wikipedia into a soapbox. See What Wikipedia is not.Elizmr 08:47, 21 December 2006 (UTC).

Arguement for keeping: The title "parody" is probably a misnomer, he is not a comedian he acted like he was for forcing American-Muslims to have special identification marks to gauge his audience's reaction.
 * On charge of Soapbox: in accord with wiki-standards (WP:SOAP) the article is obviously not "advertising"; nor "writing in self-promotion", so that leaves "Propaganda or advocacy". Nowhere in the article are any views expressed that are not in referenced quotations. No action is advocated, all quotes are properly sourced and can not be described as propaganda. The claim of violation of these wiki-standards is at odds with the definitions those standards present.
 * Notability:The story has appeared on four continents. In North America by many papers printing the Reuters story, in Europe by the “BBC and Channel 4 in England” and the London newspaper “The Guardian”; in South Asia by the “The Brunei Times” of Darussalam, Brunei; and in Africa by the "Mail & Guardian" of South Africa, and the "Daily News" of South Africa.
 * Notability Update: It was most recently mentioned in a review of significant events for Muslims in 2006 by The Milli Gazette of India on Dec. 23rd.
 * Links to other wiki-pages: The topic was first brought up on the Islamophobia wiki-page in the post 06:56, 3 December 2006 Ibnraza (Talk | contribs) (→Efforts against Islamophobia - 630 WMAL talk show hoax) and the article now under consideration provides greater background to that information and is linked to from that page. The page is also linked from the Flying Imams controversy which was the reason behind the experiment. The article in question shows that the radio host received comments on both sides of the issue to gauge if Americans were willing to use force on American-Muslims to make them receive tattoos or wear arm-bands analogous to the activities of the Nazis during World War II. Some called for American-Muslims to be placed in internment camps. This information about how some Americans are turning on others during a war with terrorist Muslim theocrats seems historically notable. Especially in light of the Quran Oath Controversy of the 110th Untied States Congress where Rep. Goode has attacked Rep-elect Ellison for his desire to use the Quran during the swearing in ceremonies as a threat to "the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America” and saying “I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies”.--Wowaconia 22:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)


 * keep per Articles for deletion/Stephen Colbert at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner above--Winypoter 08:05, 21 December 2006 (UTC) — Winypoter (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * keepThis article is well-sourced and describes a notable event. The fact that it reflects favorably on one political tendency isn't a reason to delete it.  If you think it's one-sided, find some criticism and add it.P4k 08:15, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the nom, I don't see how this article could be considered encyclopedic.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 08:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - creating a WP article about this non-notable event seems like an attempt to milk it. The NN explains the absence of criticism. ←Humus sapiens ну? 09:10, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 09:39, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Humus. yandman  10:44, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This was just a single talk show segment performed by a host who doesn't have an article of his own in Wikipedia. The content would probably merit a slight merge to Jerry Klein if that article existed. --Metropolitan90 16:34, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Cleanup/Keep This was a widely covered and discussed event in the media: Reuters (reproduced on CNN and AOL and many newspapers), The Guardian and it even has its own Wikinews article: . The article should be cleaned up though.  (If nothing else merge into "Jerry Klein.")  --64.230.127.234 18:49, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. This differs from the White House Correspondent's dinner incident in several important ways: 1) This did not occur at a high profile event, already warranting major media coverage by itself, and 2) It has not been hailed by third party credible media sources as "THE touchstone... event of the year." Charlie 19:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep response on notable event that the Guardian deemd notable, yahoo news and even incurred respons from CAIR, making it internationaly notable. --Striver 20:28, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete per Winypoter. I have heard of Steven Colbert, but not this guy. Just H 22:30, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable single event.  Jerry who?  Morton devonshire 23:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Big  top  23:37, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong/Speedy Keep Notable because of all the calls and the considerable media coverage, and just because the subject is politically motivated doesn't mean that the article is. Eyu100(t 01:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I also agree with the arguments made by Ibnraza and Wowaconia. Eyu100(t 16:02, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Notable, current, expository, significant. The nom is taking the unique stand that WP:CURRENT and WP:NPOV are bad things. Even "a small talk radio segment" can have significant and noteworthy implications, especially sociological pranks. - Keith D. Tyler &para; (AMA) 01:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Also don't merge or rename to Jerry Klein. - Keith D. Tyler &para; (AMA) 01:34, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - I am based in England, so if this US-event made BBC, Channel 4 and the Guardian then it is certainly notable in my opinion (but also a depressing sign of the times). Recently over here MP Jack Straw started a huge controversy about Muslim women wearing veils - heard about this? anyway - this led to United Kingdom debate over veils, so I see the two controversies as equally deserving of separate articles. By all means create Jerry Klein, but this event merits it's own domain. Wikipidian 02:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep The article offers a number of reputable sources which deal exclusively with the article's topic which serves to meet verifiability and notability requirements. There doesn't seem to be any legitimate reason for deletion.  The event seems to have gotten itself quite a bit of attention in more than one country.  --The Way 07:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable single event. --Gabi S. 11:40, 22 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep, notability of host/radio station is of comparatively little importance compared with the fact of, and the nature of, the public response. As Keith D. Tyler correctly states, ...even "a small talk radio segment" can have significant and noteworthy implications...  It received non-trivial media coverage and is an interesting perspective on the wider discussion on Islam's relations with the West.


 * X damr talk 03:01, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Keep He seems to be notable for his notably disgusting attempt at a joke, but notability is notability. We faithfully document the prominent idiots.DGG 03:38, 25 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per above —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dangerous-Boy (talk • contribs) 11:55, 23 December 2006 (UTC).
 * Strong keep. Reuters and The Guardian would be enough to establish notability, and that's just the beginning here. Someone needs to lecture the nominator on what exactly WP:Notability means. &mdash; coe l acan t a lk  &mdash; 15:11, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - per above. Baka man  20:05, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
 * strong keep. I heard about this from some news outlet long before I saw it on wikipedia article. It is clearly notable and verifiable. The article itself might be somewhat NPOV and need cleaning up in general. But neither of these problems merit deletion. Rdore 05:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's the notability of the issue that counts, not the notability of the radio programme; and any matter referenceable from several reliable sources qualifies for a Wikipedia article.qp10qp 16:23, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep: My first suggestion is to create Jerry Klein first and then mentioning the incident of this parody there. Surely he's notable himself? But even if this is not renamed, it should'nt be deleted. Look at the number of links in the References section. This incident is definitely notable and very famous. And now when I read this article, yes I've heard of this incident before. Notability is the principle of inclusion in Wikipedia and this incident qualifies for it without doubt.--Matt57 23:27, 24 December 2006 (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.