Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Yettaw


 * 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. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:57, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

John Yettaw

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Person know only from one single incident, shouldn't be included as per NTEMP. Please also see the discussion on the article's talk page for a previously propsed prod. Passportguy (talk) 11:10, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - His actions in this matter have a profound influence on the history of Burma. We have a number articles in Wikipedia of "single event" people who are included because of the worldly influence of their "single event" actions. Kingturtle (talk) 11:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - If his actions have a "profound influence" he can have his own article. At this point that is mearly speculation. My bet is that two weeks from now no-one will be talking about this person and he will disappear into the mist of history. Passportguy (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Her sentence was up in two weeks. She is now being sentenced again based on Yettaw's violation of the terms of her house arrest. His actions have already had their profound influence. There is no if about it. Kingturtle (talk) 12:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, and he can be mentioned in her article. However the fact that the Burmese junta is taking this as a pre-text to keep a person lockedup they wouldn't have released anyway doesn't change the fact that thsi is a one-off thing that doesn't make the particular person notable long term - again come two weeks everyone will have forgotten all about this person. Passportguy (talk) 12:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think a case can be made for WP:ONEEVENT. This should simply be a section of the Aung San Suu Kyi article. &mdash;Wrathchild (talk) 12:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect to Aung San Suu Kyi. The incident is notable enough for it to be included in the Aung San Suu Kyi but, per WP:BLP1E this person shouldn't have their own article.  That said likely search term so redirect makes sense. Dpmuk (talk) 13:07, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has plenty of accepted and acceptable articles on "one event" people. This event is significant to Burma's history, and his biography is important to the story. His biography information belongs on his own article, and not in Aung San Suu Kyi's. Kingturtle (talk) 13:54, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The effect of his actions upon international relations among many countries, the diplomatic pressures on his behalf, his treatment in prison, etc., are all notable events in themselves, which, when added to the original event of Yettaw's swim, makes for a net total of much more than a mere, single event. ↜Just  M &thinsp;E here&#8202;,&#8202;now  14:56, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment People are consusing the notability of an event with the notability of a person. The actions and the resulting conseqences are notable and should be added to Aung San Suu Kyi. The person however is still only kwown for this single event - and unless something major happens his name will have been forgotten in a few weeks. Passportguy (talk) 15:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The one event policy states that people notable for one event may have articles "if the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial", and I think both apply in this cause. 96T (talk) 16:21, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It's been awhile since I saw a "BP1E" or one-event objection. In many cases, these are silly (i.e., "We can't have an article about Chesley Sullenberger because he's only famous for landing a crippled airliner once").  This one has some merit, since John Yettaw is an asshole who will be remembered as the guy who has messed up Aung San Suu Kyi's chances for release from house arrest.  I don't think that he should be the guy who messed up the Wikipedia article about Aung San Suu Kyi as well, and this incident should not become a large section of that article.  Unless they behead him tomorrow, I expect that Yettaw will continue to be notable as he awaits trial.  If Aung San Suu Kyi dies without every being released from house arrest, he will be villified forevermore. Mandsford (talk) 18:11, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The story is still ongoing. If this is used as a justification for her continued house arrest, as unfortunately seems very probable, he'll be in the news for a good while, and probable it'll be historic in the end. She is after all an extremely important person indeed, nationally and outside her country.DGG (talk) 05:24, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep One event does not really apply if it is an event of this magnitude. This is the sort of "one event" that gets recorded in the history books and endures. This is the sort of thing Encyclopedias exist for.  Dloh  cierekim  22:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Keep, of course! This man has effectively disrupted the flow of Burmese history by directly causing Aung San Suu Kyi's arrest. It would be like deleting the article for Jack Ruby. Well, not exactly, but you see what I mean. Crazy Eddy (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep I first learned of this man by reading the Wiki article on Suu Kyi-- I saw his name, and that it was marked in blue as a Wiki link, and immediately wanted more information about him specifically (and separate from her). If there had been no Wiki link, I would have wondered why.  I do not agree that he has played any material part in altering the course of Burmese history: Suu Kyi was not going to be released by the junta no matter what Mr. Yettaw did, I think we all can agree on that that by now.  He only provided a thin legal pretext.  But as pretext, he becomes notable— WAY notable-- for this single incident.  I am a person who uses Wikipedia often, and I depend on it for "heart-of-the=matter" information that I cannot get elsewhere: things like verifying that Yettaw was merely a thoughtless jerk who wanted to see if he could stick his finger into the politics of another country for his own aggrandizement.  I wondered initially if he was a die-hard journalist of some kind or maybe a CIA operative.  Wikipedia-- and ONLY Wikipedia-- gave me a quick, concise, accurate answer.  If this article were clearly an attempt by the man himself to increase his notoriety, I would feel very differently.  But it isn't.  It's news, and it's INTERESTING news, and I use Wikipedia, and I wanted information about HIM. Totally keep.  --  KDS 4444   Talk  - May 19th, 2009, 5:12 pm Pacific Time.  —Preceding undated comment added 00:12, 20 May 2009 (UTC).
 * Keep Per reasons stated above regarding his impact on Suu Kyi's house arrest. Also, in-state media have said jack squat about him; this is the best anyone from Missouri's going to get unless someone from Springfield or KC actually go to Falcon and write something up about him.  This is the most concise information I've seen about him.  --KHill-LTown (talk) 02:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep!!! This guy is now part of Myanamar's foundation myth much like Benedict Arnold, Betsy Ross, and Mrs. O'leary's cow (Chicago Fire). And it's a darn fine entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.165.96.71 (talk • contribs)


 * 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.