Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Syring (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Remember BLP applies.  MBisanz  talk 00:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Patrick Syring
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I nominated this article for deletion in August 2007 shortly after its creation as a clear violation of WP:BLP1E. Since then the subject, a low-level diplomat who made an appalling voice mail, pled guilty to a minor charge against him after the judge criticized the indictment as weak, he got a year of prison, has been released, and the press coverage disappeared. The page is still an orphan, only one link in an article that mentions it en passant. I'm hoping that now that the event isn't immediately in the news and all over blogs, and that there is more of a Wikipedia consensus that this sort of article is highly inappropriate, we can get the correct result and delete this article this time. THF (talk) 03:24, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 03:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  —THF (talk) 03:27, 3 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:BIO1E and rename Dlabtot (talk) 04:20, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, although we could make an article about the event and make this a redirect, as WP:BIO1E suggests. Avram (talk) 04:51, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep- The story has plenty of notability, I say leave it as it is, or rename to the court case with a redirect from his name. Umbralcorax (talk) 04:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep- Well sourced in reliable sources, so this article easily passes our requirements for verifiability and notability. Reyk  YO!  05:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per above but it seems premature to declare WP:SNOW right out the gate. JBsupreme (talk) 07:21, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. The last AfD closed as keep, and nothing's changed, so WP:NOTAGAIN.-- S Marshall   Talk / Cont  08:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nothing's changed, reliable sources. Time for "a type of precipitation in the form of crystalline water ice". yandman  10:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ONEEVENT and WP:RECENT. Had Syring been a notable person before jumping into this bizarre, awesome folly, 1) he would be worth having an article on in the first place, and 2) his opinions and the IRL-trolling incident they spawned would actually have been important.  He wasn't, and so he didn't, and so it wasn't (at least not very).  This is not a biographical article; this is an article on one particular, damning incident with enough of the surface trappings of a biographical article that it's possible someone might accidentally mistake it for the sum of a life.  In the long term, this event will fade into a footnote to James Zogby and the Arab American Institute, and so those are the articles where (sourced) mention of this incident should find a home, if anywhere.  Always when dealing with BLP issues on these private individuals who blunder onto the media's stage for their fifteen minutes of infamy, the question should not be, Is this notable? (per WP:NOTE), but should instead be, Is this noteworthy? (per WP:RECENT, the spirit of WP:BLP, and common sense).   --Dynaflow   babble  10:31, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Rename to Patrick Syring threats to the Arab American Institute or Patrick Syring anti-Arab comments (or similar), and rewrite from the perspective of the event, not the person, per WP:BLP1E-- cover the event, not the person. I think the series of events is notable, but the current article focuses too much on the otherwise non-notable Syring. &mdash; LinguistAtLarge • Talk  16:02, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Appalling and vicious attacks by a "diplomat" can be both newsworthy and encyclopedic. Thoughtful renaming of the article might be appropriate. Edison (talk) 05:48, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and move discussion on naming to article's talk page. Event is notable. Article is well sourced.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep or Rename as part of a well-documented series of recent anti-Arab political expression in the United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.69.49 (talk) 08:37, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, but severely trim for BLP compliance. Stifle (talk) 20:13, 6 March 2009 (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.