Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim DeChristopher


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 02:59, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Tim DeChristopher

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Person notable only because of one event; this would seem to fall under WP:ONEEVENT. Recommend delete. Mr. Vernon (talk) 06:21, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I suppose it is true DeChristopher "has been in the news" only because of a single event, but I also find the event fairly substantial. Furhtermore, not only do "reliable sources" "cover the person in the context of a particular event" (the sale of public land in Utah), but they dedicate entire articles specifically to his act of civil disobedience and environmental activism. Vasilken 06:41, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I realize you created the article and thus believe it should be here. However, as you mention, all the coverage is in the context of this news event.  Had this event not happened, there wouldn't be (any?) secondary sources on the subject, because he wouldn't be newsworthy. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 07:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment There will be further coverage of him as federal prosecutors prepare to file charges against him while activist organizations consider ways to help him. In any case, what is the "passability" test for this? If the case were to drag on for months, with continuous news coverage, would the article still be subject to deletion since everything was centered around the original event? Alternatively, if he were acquitted this time but was later arrested for, say, armed bank robbery, would the entry be allowed to stay because he would have been newsworthy in the context of two events? Finally, should we also delete the entry for Gavrilo Princip? He was only known in the context of a single event, too! Vasilken 11:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * "There will be further coverage..." "If the case were to drag on for months..."  "If he were acquitted but later arrested for, say, armed bank robbery..."  WP:FUTURE.  None of this has happened yet.  As of now, he has been in the news for one and only one event, and you should know better than to compare an entry on him to one on the chap who set off the spark that resulted in World War I.  If he becomes that famous, if there are books written about him, then we can recreate the article.  Remember WP:SCRABBLE.  If this event is that noteworthy, create an article on the event, not the person, as per WP:ONEEVENT.  --Mr. Vernon (talk) 02:05, 25 December 2008 (UTC)


 * WP:ONEEVENT. Delete. StonerDude420 (talk) 07:02, 24 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Not a biography, a one-off news event. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 09:09, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:17, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Unclear where to merge the information. Until we know what to do with it, it doesn't make sense to delete it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:35, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Two good independent RSs. Probable public effect, possibly even of national significance. If the story never develops dfurther, no prejudice against reconsidering. DGG (talk) 22:55, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton Tropical  Cyclone  02:19, 29 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The article isn't about him, it's about his action. It was a very minor, not-notable event.  TJ   Spyke   02:43, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep: I looked at lots of articles trying to read about his action and trial. It would be nice to have it on Wikipedia. Jeshii (talk) 20:48, 4 March 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.

(talk) 28 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.243.252 (talk)
 * Keep Tim DeChristopher's environmental activism and emergence as a public figure that sparked protests throughout the United States and garnered international media coverage warrants a Wikipedia page about him, his actions, and his experience in the American judicial system. This is not a one-off media event. DeChristopher's initial act of defiance has lead to a two-year debate about civil disobedience as means to promote environmental awareness and protection. It has also become a lense through which Americans have gained sobering insight into their justice system. The fact that DeChristopher's Wikipedia page is garnering such heated debate (while countless personal pages exhibiting far less deserving individuals)underscores the level of public interest and events surrounding this person. If this was truly a "one-off" media event, or if people were only interested in a single event rather than the man behind the movement, the existence/deletion of a Tim DeChristopher Wikipedia page would go unnoticed.