Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Tripp


 * 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 to TSLAQ. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Martin Tripp

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Individual is not notable outside of controversial involvement with Tesla Inc. Article is only about the incident, not Tripp as a person thus shouldn't be a biographical article Springee (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Support as nominator. Tripp isn't notable other than being a victim of Tesla. The company or Tesla fanatics have an ugly history of attacking those they see as enemies. This article was created by a brand new account and seems to only tell the Tesla side of the story. Tripp was only in the news because after he tried to blow the wistle with respect to things he was concerned about, the company or those working behalf of the company went on the offensive. [] The biography of Tripp is solely focused on this one event and it's aftermath. The content may have a place in some other Tesla related article but not a stand alone biograph. Springee (talk) 04:01, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Propose a Merge with TSLAQ. Tripp content will need some work but is relevant. QRep2020 (talk) 06:41, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator's reasons. While this person has been named in the media they are not themselves notable in regard to the reported events or indeed anything else. An article about them that outlines real-life accusations against them of a crime for which they must be presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law is not only not encyclopedic but also serves to hurt them in real-life. Lklundin (talk) 07:03, 27 April 2020 (UTC) PS. As such, I am somewhat surprised that our criteria for WP:SPEEDY deletion does not include articles such as this one.


 * Delete per WP:BLP1E. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 09:07, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Merge with either Tesla, Inc. or List_of_lawsuits_and_controversies_of_Tesla,_Inc.. Nominator notes that "The content may have a place in some other Tesla related article but not a stand alone biograph", which to me indicates a merge is more appropriate. I believe the events described in the article are important and relevant to Tesla, and should not be deleted. re: Lklundin, Tripp played a key role in the reported events, so I don't think it's accurate to say he is not notable in regard to these events. And if there is any objectionable or libelous content, it should be removed immediately, per WP:GRAPEVINE and WP:BLPCRIME--I believe that is outside the scope of the deletion discussion. [Edited to add reasoning] Stonkaments (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC) 15:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Thebiv19 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Thebiv19 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. Thebiv19 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Thebiv19 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Thebiv19 (talk) 14:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete This seems to me to violate the not news guidelines. We need to think in broad, encyclopedic terms in creating articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:59, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 15:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Comment about merge: What is the target article? Several editors have suggested merging the content. I agree that, if neutrally presented, much of this content could be used elsewhere (TSLAQ, Tesla Inc etc). If there is a way to preserve the content (someone's sandbox?), for what it's worth, I think that's fine. It would be helpful if there was a suggested location for the merge. As a negative BLP about someone who at best hasn't been convicted of any wrong doing and at worst is really a concerned whistle blower who has been attacked by Tesla et al this as a stand alone article should not exist. Springee (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:BLP1E and also the comment above by Johnpacklambert about not news. A brief mention in the Tesla article might work, but I don't think it warrants a merge. Maybe a forward. Probably not even that though. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:MILL - I'm confused why this is not a classic BLP1E case. Bearian (talk) 00:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the most suitable target article would be List_of_lawsuits_and_controversies_of_Tesla,_Inc., with possibly a short mention on the lawsuits and controversies section of the main Tesla, Inc. article as well. Stonkaments (talk) 05:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.