Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Notable JFK Airport employees


 * 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. --Core desat 01:25, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Notable JFK Airport employees

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

What is this list supposed to demonstrate? People who are notable for working at JFK Airport? But if you look closely at the links, all the names mentioned are people who were convicted or accused of crimes (as opposed to executives, etc.), a veiled attempt at something (don't know what the word is). Tinlinkin 09:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - unreferenced and quite pointless --Docg 09:56, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment most of the people on the list don't seem to have worked at JFK, and have been added by an anonymous user whose already been pinged for vandalism. There is every possibility that the only notable employees at JFK are famous because of crimes, but there is still the question of whether the article is actually needed Guycalledryan 10:03, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as a trivial association. Someone's place of employment is not an important aspect of who they are, unless it's the place of employment that makes them notable.  That is not the case here.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 15:11, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, pointless list. NawlinWiki 18:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per NawlinWiki; I disagree with the nominator's rationale and with Arkyan's statement: if one's employer is trivial we should be deleting all the company cats like Category:Apple Inc. employees. We're not for good reason: one's employers are not trivial even if one isn't famous for one's association with that employer. Carlossuarez46 21:28, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * My position is actually more toward NawlinWiki's. If the employees mentioned are notable for contributing to the airport's operation, then I wouldn't have nominated this article for deletion (a hard fact I learned from my nomination of Crew of Sesame Street). But the only people that are mentioned are involved in things like Air France Robbery (1967) and Lufthansa heist or are part of crime families is inappropriate as anti-NPOV. I don't oppose recreation or cleanup, but the list has to make sense and not single out a certain set/class of persons or create a POV from the people mentioned. Tinlinkin 21:55, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you might have missed my point - the people in Category:Apple Inc. employees are notable as Apple employees, not just notable people who happen to have been employed by Apple. Someone's place of employment only becomes important if that's what makes them important.  Ark yan  &#149; (talk) 15:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh really, when I think of Al Gore, the first tick in his notability box is his Apple employment. Has he done anything else? The same is true of lots of other people who are listed in various employees groups, people who once worked for X are now famous for doing or being Y. Carlossuarez46 18:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. Punkmorten 22:19, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete for unsourced information, the removal of which would leave almost nothing. Even if it is sourced, if the fact that these people worked at JFK is so important, it can be put on the JFK airport article. It's not like Crew of Sesame Street, which is clearly too large for such an action. Someguy1221 22:22, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, if this were notable former airport employees, the way that Steve Buscemi is former NYFD, it would still be a bit pointless. As it is it feels to me like a goofy way to either suggest that other airport employees are also criminals, or that these criminals some how aren't noticed enough even though they all have their own articles and a couple of common ones (Air France Robbery and Lufthansa heist). The expectation for an article like this is top executives or spokespeople. --Dhartung | Talk 08:44, 17 May 2007 (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.