Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Menusa

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. &mdash; Xezbeth 19:42, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Joseph Menusa
We don't have articles on the other 1000+ soldiers who have died in the Iraq war. RickK 22:17, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, wikipedia is not a memorial--nixie 23:32, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a memorial, we haven't articles neither on the other 1000+ soldiers who have died in the Iraq war, nor on the Iraqis who have died there or in the billions of wars of the history of the humanity.
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Zzyzx11 | Talk 00:26, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep or Transwiki to a Iraq war memorial wiki. This guy died to make the world safe for democracy. Klonimus 02:22, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * ...but Wikipedia is not a democracy, so delete. Radiant_* 07:22, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * That's a matter of opinion, but neither point has a bearing on this issue. Or would you like an article on every person who died in World War II on the Allied side, as well?  RickK 00:33, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Sure why not. I know that Yad Vashem has a project to collect names an biographies of everyone who dided in the holocaust. Klonimus 02:36, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * That's nice for them, but Wikipedia is not a memorial.   &mdash; J I P | Talk 17:12, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I consider using "to make the world safe for democracy" to mean "to further the USA government's cause" extremely POV, and take offense at it. Menusa has died a heroic death but he fought for a nation, not an universal, non-disputed force of good.   &mdash; J I P | Talk 06:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * My vote above was vandalised by User:24.18.157.93, who changed "heroic" to "heretic".   &mdash; J I P | Talk 17:14, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, and I'm not responding to the suggestion that we should base deletion policy on the moral character of the article's subject. Rhobite 05:10, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, wikipedia is not a memorial. Megan1967 07:14, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - because the number of U.S., British and other Coalition soldiers dying in the recent war was so low, and because media scrutiny actually makes it possible to know quite a lot about them, it would actually be plausible to have articles on all those who have died. The question is - why should we? A list of them with brief biographical details would probably (hopefully!) survive VfD and would be my preferred response. In the absence of a list, why keep an individual article? Has an individual American soldier done something noteable in the recent war just by dying in it? The answer is, arguably, yes - WW2 and Iraqi deaths in the war are bad analogies because that would involve making far more articles on individuals for whom there is often little information. Local press coverage of deaths in the recent war is pretty extensive, and the impact on a local community of a "local hero" dying in the war shouldn't be overlooked. From the point of view of the entire USA, most individuals will be non-notable but from the point of view of a (substantial) local community an individual may well be. The fact that Menusa was the first person from the Philippines to die in the conflict does swing me towards a keep vote, for now, but if somebody put a list together, I'd rather set this as a redirect to that. VivaEmilyDavies 21:04, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with everything said in the above comment. Klonimus 02:36, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a memorial. -- Egil 11:31, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)


 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.