Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trevor Rees-Jones (bodyguard)


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Trevor Rees-Jones (bodyguard)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This page is about a subject that is a classic example of notability for a SingleEvent. I think the ideal is for a couple of the more substantial points of this entry to be moved to Death of Diana, Princess of Wales and the rest deleted. Samuelshraga (talk) 15:48, 6 December 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Events, Royalty and nobility,  and England. Skynxnex (talk) 17:12, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep Most of the coverage from the time of the crash seems to be GNG. I couldn't find much for after this date, except this:, The NZ Herald is a RS per our lists and it likely meets "sustained coverage". Scattered mentions about this person of late in the Daily Mail and other newspapers that aren't RS, somewhat supporting the idea of sustained coverage. French Vanity Fair article about him from 2022 and in ELLE France, confirming he now works at Astra Zeneca as a security guard . Oaktree b (talk) 19:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that he meets GNG - but I think only for the event itself. I don't think the encyclopedia suffers from missing out on his subsequent life. I agree that he receives coverage after the fact, but the coverage is invariably as "Diana's bodyguard" or "survivor of the car crash". Samuelshraga (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, he is known for a single event, but it was an incredibly significant event and he received extremely extensive and sustained coverage, enough to easily meet WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:15, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep meets WP:BASIC. While essentially notable for that SingleEvent, as he was the sole survivor and the incident remains of interest he has been and will continue to be subject to significant ongoing media coverage. Mztourist (talk) 11:54, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Known for one event, but it was a big 'un. Dr Clyde Crashcup (talk) 13:04, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * It definitely was a big event, and I don't think he shouldn't appear on wikipedia - just that he should maybe get a small section on the event's entry rather than getting one of his own. Samuelshraga (talk) 16:14, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a classic WP:BIO1E. There is nothing that he did before or since that would raise him up to GNG, and even his role in this one event appears to be as "passenger." Lamona (talk) 04:51, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Merge pertinenet details into the article about the car crash that killed Princess Diana would be the best solution. Mr. Jones is only notable for this event alone, a clear-cut case of WP:BIO1E. TH1980 (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep his text passes WP:NBOOK; reached #1 on the The Observer (UK) and #2 on the NYT non-fiction hardback bestseller lists, I stopped counting the reviews on Newspapers.com after finding 20. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 12:23, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:NBOOK is about the notability of a book, not a person. It may be possible to argue that the book is notable (I'm dubious but would be interested in such a discussion) but I don't believe that would provide support for this person. Lamona (talk) 00:48, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * FWIW, also satisfies WP:NAUTHOR c.3. It would not be an outcome that would make this a better encyclopeaedia that we could have an article about the subject's autobiography, but not an article about him. In this case, given the matters of concern, it's far more common sensical to have an article about the person rather than the book. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 06:39, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep rises above WP:BIO1E (see The general rule is to cover the event, not the person. However, if media coverage of both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles may become justified.) due to the success of his autobiography enough other coverage over the years, so a standalone article seems justified. So seems to meet both WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG. Skynxnex (talk) 21:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR. The event is also a big world event to justify the article. - The9Man  ( Talk ) 17:14, 16 December 2022 (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.