Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonnie Marbles


 * 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. causa sui (talk) 03:08, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Jonnie Marbles

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable. One event. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  17:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC) Kittybrewster   &#9742;  17:58, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone can provide any further references about this comedian. Several Times (talk) 18:12, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's the best I can find besides all the frothy, pie-related media coverage. He might have a blog as well but that's hardly a decent source. Several Times (talk) 18:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * That's pretty much a textbook example of a passing mention. Cullen328 (talk) 19:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP1E. No coverage in reliable sources until today's publicity stunt. Cullen328 (talk) 18:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E and per WP:NOTNEWS. Edison (talk) 18:42, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 18:54, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:ONEVENT. //Gbern3 (talk) 20:11, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I think in the coming days this article will come more prominent, Hes also a sucesfull comedian and activist. I recommend you tag it for rescue. Goldblooded (talk) 21:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Yep, this is major news around the world. In fact, it's the first thing in the news around the world. Keep. --Tris2000 (talk) 22:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Difficult to think of a clearer cut case of WP:BLP1E. Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:54, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment The fact is that he wasn't at all notable 24 hours ago, and so shouldn't have a Wikipedia biography based on a single event, especially something that was really just a stunt. If this jumpstarts his career as a comedian (or whatever), and he gets ongoing coverage, the article can be recreated at that time. See WP:TOOSOON Cullen328 (talk) 05:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Too early to delete it, you can't say that he's only notable for one event and that said event is a passing one when it hasn't even been 24 hours since the event in question occurred. There are several cases where a person comes into the spotlight and stays in it, or where a notable event caused by them draws attention to lesser known ones. This guy was plastered all over international media, this isn't just a bio on someone from an obscure local newspaper. 174.114.87.236 (talk) 03:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment You can’t justify deletion by saying that an event is passing when it hasn’t even passed yet. News happens, that he wasn’t notable 24 hours ago doesn’t change that he’s now notable. Now that the article is created only time can show whether it warrants deletion.174.114.87.236 (talk) 17:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:BLP1E without prejudice for undeleting and expanding if further events warrant. Rivertorch (talk) 06:50, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Probably should have been speedy'd initially. Nevard (talk) 11:16, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Quite right. I apologise. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  16:23, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete, too early to keep it. Currently the article falls under WP:ONEVENT. Recreate it, if he does it again.--Ben Ben (talk) 11:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Give him his footnote in history. Francium12  11:36, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:BLP1E --Cameron Scott (talk) 12:41, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Roll some of the information into articles relevant to the events, he's not notable otherwise. 173.177.167.208 (talk) 13:29, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete relevant info could perhaps be smerged into Rupert Murdoch (which sounds like a very unpleasant experience...) Yunshui (talk) 13:32, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete- BLP1E exists for situations like this. And a minnow slap for the creator. We should know better than this by now. Its possible he might become notable for more than one event later, but we can revisit that at a later date. Umbralcorax (talk) 17:07, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above. He just isn't a notable comedian.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:52, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. He hasn't done anything except one pieing, and as a person isn't notable enough to have his own article. (IP because I have no Wikipedia account.) 86.182.169.180 (talk) 12:08, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep If someone in the future stumbles upon a mention of Jonnie Marbles in a book or in a magazine article it might be very helpful to find out what the author was referring to. If, on the other hand, all mentions of his name disappear, one will be kept wondering what was being alluded to. Oclupak (talk) 13:43, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete 86.147.56.13 (talk) 12:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete - as plain an example of WP:BLP1E as they come. Nothing in our policies justifies having an article on this person. Robofish (talk) 20:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:BLP1E. Some mention of the incident should be merged into Rupert Murdoch; I note that the incident is already mentioned at News International phone hacking scandal.   Rich wales (talk · contribs) 02:40, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete; the guy deserves a medal, but we can't give him a wikipedia page for a single event. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:43, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to News International phone hacking scandal where we can give brief mention of it with regard to the Committee hearing. He doesn't seem to be notable other than for that one event. TheRetroGuy (talk) 16:08, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Incubate for two weeks before releasing to article space without prejudice to a new AfD. Claims that this topic fails WP:NOTNEWS, WP:ONEEVENT, or WP:BLP1E are WP:CRYSTAL.  Likewise, the keep !votes are premature.  A reason for incubating for two weeks is to allow time for the weekly news magazines to weigh in.  Unscintillating (talk) 01:34, 25 July 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.