Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Tyner


 * 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   redirect. If we look at this debate in terms of raw numbers there is no clear consensus for a particular course of action. If we instead look at the strength of the arguments and their basis in Wikipedia policy, we must discount several comments here that have little to no basis in policy and engage in hyperbole and unsubstantiated predictions about the future notoriety of this individual. A spinoff article on as suggested here is a fine idea, but in it's absence a redirect to the current article on the TSA will have to do. Any content worth merging can pulled from the redirect page's history. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:51, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

John Tyner

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

WP:BLP1E  Roger  talk 14:07, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:12, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Postpone deletion: For a couple weeks anyway. Just because he might become an ongoing organizer on this issue. Meanwhile, if anyone opposed to deletion comes along who wants to do something constructive, Transportation Security Administration needs an NPOV section on criticism of TSA on the invasive searches issue. CarolMooreDC (talk) 22:39, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with nom, WP:BLP1E. Also, WP:NOTNEWS. Tyner being in the news for this one event does not mean he has lasting notability. However, the subject of passenger screening is one that has lasting notability. I suggest that the article TSA passenger screening be created (split off from the TSA article). (TSA is currently large enough to fork.) Such an article would have lasting notability and could contain history of screening (like sniffers that were not widely successful) as well as recent changes and the criticism of people like Tyner. The only reason to have an article about Tyner or this single event is if the article on the real subject (incl all events associated with that subject) is large enough to split into multiple articles. Since there is not an article specifically about TSA passenger screening, why would we have a fork (specific event/person) article? Summary: delete, redirect to a section of TSA passenger screening if someone wants to create it. - ¢Spender1983 (talk) 13:05, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Transportation Security Administration as a plausible search term based on news coverage. Alternatively, the same could be done to the proposed spinout article recommended by ¢Spender1983 above if it is created.  Jim Miller  See me 20:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Do not delete. ( a ) What transpired involving John Tyner is historically similar to Rosa Parks, and because of this event and the bravery he displayed, he will remain a person of history from this point forward.  ( b ) He also has galvanized the indignity of a majority of the American people against government intrusions into their rights of privacy.  ( c ) Finally, on the lighter side, he will remain forever famous for his quote, "If you touch my junk, I will have you arrested!"  Such things are history made of...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.30.187.181 (talk) 21:48, 21 November 2010 (UTC)  — 24.30.187.181 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. He's already had a significant cultural impact. -- Evans1982 (talk) 00:03, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, notability established by press coverage. Everyking (talk) 05:35, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or merge/redirect if desired. Ultimately this is a case of WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTNEWS that is best covered very briefly at an article related to the TSA or criticism of its policies. Very little of the article is actually about the subject (rather it is about an incident), and there isn't enough information about the person himself to create a legitimate WP:BLP. Information about the incident is better served at another article as indicated. Likewise, the information in "Aftermath of the incident" appears to become tangential and speculative about general sentiment toward current TSA policies and is inappropriate for this article. Also, responding to the above request to postpone deletion, assuming he might become notable as an anti-TSA figurehead is speculative WP:RECENTISM and is not a legitimate reason to justify retaining an article about him at this time. -- Kinu t /c  06:45, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Rename/Move to non-bio event article, per Steven Slater precedent. This event is certainly notable, even more so than the Steven Slater incident.  Like the former, it's served as a lightning rod issue to focus people's rejection of the new TSA methods - naked scanners and groping.  I would also ask that the closing admin do this move to non-bio "without prejudice," as Tyner may well continue to be in the spotlight - likely as an activist in the movement against aggressive TSA practices. -Helvetica (talk) 10:17, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Redirect Classic WP:BLP1E. Redirect to Transportation Security Administration. Ronnotel (talk) 13:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep/Rename/Redirect I created the article (FWIW). I agree with the criticism that Tyner is notable only for one event, although I think it is possible that his notability will be turn out to be of a more enduring type that warrants a biographical article. In any case, the event itself is clearly very notable (more than the Stephen Slater incident, as someone noted), as demonstrated by the wide news coverage, and I think it deserves to have its own article separate from the articles on TSA screening, etc. (which could link to it). To summarize, the article should not be deleted but it may make sense to rename it "Don't touch my junk incident" or something similar, and add a redirect from John Tyner. This will be easy to do since the content of the article will require little if any modification. Primalbeing (talk) 08:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Jayme (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:19, 23 November 2010 (UTC).
 * Keep/Rename/Redirect We have to put the information somewhere. This controversy is all over the news. Vchimpanzee ·  talk  ·  contributions  · 20:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect Press coverage does not establish notability, the article does not reference any "significant cultural impact", and the fact that an article on Steven Slater exists does not indicate that this one should be kept. Furthermore, it's simply implausible for this to become a full-fledged article because there's insufficient information.The incident lasted a few moments, stopped, and won't begin again. No new information is on the way, and there is too little to write about. Efforts to keep this seem to be textbook examples of WP:Recentism, WP:NOTNEWS, and WP:NOTCRYSTAL. Merge the information to relevant places and redirect it to Transportation Security Administration. If it becomes notable a year from now, then it can be written. But it's not notable right now.  dm yers t urnbull   ⇒ talk 02:49, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Obviously falls under WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTNEWS. Can be recreated if it ever has lasting significance. wjemather bigissue 18:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete none notable self-publicist with one none notable event. MilborneOne (talk) 19:40, 27 November 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.