Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Sonnenberg


 * 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. Subject passes GNG. Drmies (talk) 15:10, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Joel Sonnenberg

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not finding much in the way of significant coverage for this person; being a feelgood story doesn't obviate the need to demonstrate notability The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 23:41, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:54, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --Legis (talk - contribs) 08:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Try viewing the Google News links in the "find sources" link above. Significant coverage exists. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:34, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - There is a lot of coverage about this person available, however, most of it relates to one incident, so WP:BLP1E may apply. A documentary about his story won an Emmy Award and a Peabody Award (Chicago Tribune). His story appears to have been reported nationally (Boston Globe, USA Today, Los Angeles Times). This seems like significant coverage to me. 137.43.188.69 (talk) 12:27, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as lacking in-depth coverage in reliable, independent third-party sources. Should such sources be integrated into the article feel free to leave a note on my talk page and I'll take another look. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:28, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Please stop mindlessly copy and pasting the same message in every AFD tagged for Rescue.  D r e a m Focus  18:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Note that topic notability is based upon the availability of reliable sources, and not upon whether or not sources are present in Wikipedia articles. This person has been covered extensively in reliable sources. The !vote above to delete doesn't appear to be based upon even an actual quick, cursory search for sources. Hopefully Wikipedia articles won't be deleted per this type of rationale, based upon what appears to be an analysis of current sourcing in articles rather than the availability of reliable sources. If this type of precedent were to exist, then any article could be deleted without actual qualification for the deletion. Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:24, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Mr. Pot, I'd like to introduce you to Mr. Kettle. The Blade of the Northern Lights  ( 話して下さい ) 16:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I have tagged the article for rescue, I will try to edit the article myself to add sources, but as many of the sources are not available to me beyond a short abstract, I would appreciate other help. The sources I mentioned above should be a good start. 109.77.39.88 (talk) 23:18, 9 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep A person is notable if an award winning documentary has been made about them.   D r e a m Focus  18:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything in WP:N which mandates that; perhaps you'd care to back that up with sources? (Seriously, if you can I'll gladly change my mind) The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 16:46, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment (e/c)While I respectfully disagree with DreamFocus that a person is notable if a documentary about them wins an award, The documentary itself should be considered coverage in a reliable source. The fact that a CBS program has devoted "much of its hour to following how Sonnenberg..." adds to the significant coverage that is already present. To address Stuartyeates' comment above, in my opinion, whether sources are integrated into the article matters little to this discussion, as we do not delete articles for issues that can be fixed by editing, and adding sources to an article is editing, we should only be concerned about whether sources exist. I mentioned in my !vote that WP:BLP1E may apply, I am now of the opinion that it does not, because the event (Sonnenberg's family's car being crashed into by a tractor trailer), is not the main reason that he is notable, rather, it is his recovery from his burns, his attitude, facing the truck driver who caused the incident in court and many other issues. The sources I have cited only spend a minority of their words talking about the initial event, and the majority about other issues. Hence my keep is no longer weak. 137.43.16.22 (talk) 17:19, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - This person is covered in numerous reliable sources in detail. See Google News link below for some of them:
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment Nice work by Northamerica1000, thoughtful analysis by 137.43.16.22.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I added two refs, by themselves sufficient to establish WP:N notability as per WP:GNG (in combination with WP:NRVE, given that one of the references is an abstract).  Unscintillating (talk) 02:18, 14 December 2011 (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.