Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Kostric


 * 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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 13:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

William Kostric

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

Despite the press this man has received, a biographical article on him apparently fails WP:BIO and specifically WP:BLP1E; the individual played a very small role in a larger event, and any mention of him should be included in an article/articles about the event. He does not meet the notability requirements for his own article and, if anything, his page should be turned into a redirect to where he is mentioned elsewhere. Vicenarian (Said · Done) 17:21, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep/ speedy close This AfD is premature. This is a developing story, so we don't know yet what level of notability this individual or the related issues have. It may be the case that nothing further develops and this can be merged into an appropriate article. But deleting it now despite the substantial news coverage before its relevance is fully apparent is not in the interests of building an encyclopedia. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:41, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep While it may currently seem not notable, it may become notable later on. The event has just taken place, give it some time. Warrior  4321  18:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - The article itself fails WP:BIO and really, the only notability that's offered up goes towards proving the event's notability, not the person's. Regardless of if more information will come out or not, this single person isn't likely to ever have signifigant notability. Just the event. Lithorien (talk) 19:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per the nom's statement and reasoning. If it turns out, after all the hoopla dies down, that this subject does meet the notability criteria, then we can always recreate this article. → javért breakaway 19:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment My comment concentrates on the last sentence: "Just as in Mr. Kostric's case, no gun crimes were being committed and no arrests were made."  This statement taken from the final sentence in the article is not supported in the article itself.  There was no mention of actual charges, potential charges, comments of the secret service nor comments of police officers regarding the nature of the arrest.  A record of false arrest would be necessary to justify the sentence.  The statement implies there have been no valid gun related arrests in association with protest demonstrations - a false claim.  "Richard Terry Young, 62, of 821 Ocean Blvd. in Hampton, was arrested around 9:40 a.m., hours before Obama's arrival, and charged with the misdemeanor crimes of criminal trespass and carrying a loaded pistol without a license." source link http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20090811-NEWS-908119961.  I hope this article will be edited and presented without what I see to be clear bias.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kitkatlady (talk • contribs) 19:25, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You are welcome to edit the article yourself if you feel it can be improved. Vicenarian  (Said · Done) 19:30, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. The entry doesn't even try to present a biography, it's an account of an event. Hairhorn (talk) 19:27, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep for now I agree with ChildofMidnight here. The event just happened, so we don't know what will happen.  If it turns out that this was just a minor incident, it can be deleted, but we don't know if this story is going to explode or not. The Weak Willed 19:32, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Textbook example of WP:BLP1E. As to some comments, we shouldn't be in the habit of keeping articles and then if the person doesn't become more notable delete it.  We should delete non-notable BLP's and if later he becomes notable, then the article can easily be recreated.--Cube lurker (talk) 19:45, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - hi, welcome to WP:BLP1E. The guy showed up to make a controversial statement, got some press out of it, his 15 minutes are over, and we have nothing outside of his little demonstration to prove he's got any continuing notability. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Saying something that is evolving is one event seems a bit overconfident to me. At the worst, some of it can be merged to Free State Project or to an article on health care reform efforts or an article on the related protests. I don't see what the big rush is. We don't know how this issue will progress or if it will. We don't know if this indivudal will continue to campaign. Why not give it 2 weeks? ChildofMidnight (talk) 22:40, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
 * We don't create biographies for people in anticipation that they may, perhaps, become notable. We create articles for people who are ALREADY notable. Just being mentioned in the news doesn't make you a notable person, as WP:BLP1E states; if we agree in principle that this individual is not notable now, then he shouldn't have an article now. If/when he becomes notable, he can have an article. In any case, this AfD will run for a week, so he at least has that period of time to assert notability. Vicenarian  (Said · Done) 22:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep What this man did was newsworthy, it just remains to be seen if it turns into a significant movement--as evidenced by the recent events in Phoenix. Time will tell.  If this fizzles, THEN we should delete this page, but not before. But regardless, there is definitely some room for more linking and redirects, since it is very likely that people researching Open Carry will continue to search on his name. Trasel (talk) 00:53, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Being "newsworthy" is a poor defense of an encyclopedia entry. This isn't a newspaper. And at any rate the news, if anything, is the event. Hairhorn (talk) 01:27, 22 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Wholeheartedly agree with Cube lurker. Take away this guy's gun, and he wouldn't merit an entry into Wikipedia. It's the event, not the man that was the thrust of the news stories - and even the event wasn't all that noteworthy. If anyone can remember this guy's name one year from now, contact me on August 22, 2010 and I'll rewrite the article myself. TruthGal (talk) 06:18, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge - This article and bio do not contain their own context. That is to say, Kostric does not by himself have any significance. The phenomenon of the town-hall meetings and their backlash and protests and counter-protests are part of this year's national debate on health care, insurance, and government intervention in the medical services market. These meetings and the protests are a significant factor in the larger debate on health care. The town-hall meetings and protests should have their own article, as a sub-article on Obama's health care agenda. This sub-article should contain all the major events that composed this part of the debate, including the belligerence of the protesters, the violence of the counter-protesters and protesters, and the phenomenon of open-carrying gun owners presence at the debate. As yet, none of this has a clear ending or resolution, so perhaps it would be best to wait and then merge all related bios and articles into one single article on grassroots protests and town hall debates, once their significance becomes clearer. To ignore Kostric would be a clear effort to bleach history of unpopular protesters, but (as yet) he lacks the significance of his own context. --D. Bier-- 08:24, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:BLP1E poster child. Our article says nothing about him except he stood outside a building for an hour. That's an article about an event, not about a person. No evidence that any of the news outlets that covered the event were any interested in the person either. One sentence could possibly be squeezed into an article about how heated up Americans are about Obama's health care proposal, but needn't contain Kostric's name. --GRuban (talk) 17:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Sorry to post again (I already earlier voted to Delete), but a "If a tree falls in the forest" analogy occurred to me. A guy shows up with a gun to an event... but he doesn't shoot anyone with it -- he's, in fact, at no point anywhere near President Obama. There seems to be nothing remarkable about this, right? A tree didn't fall in the forest in this case. Or another way -- if Oswald took his rifle up to the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963 and didn't fire it... would he be notable enough to warrant entry into Wikipedia? I can't imagine there'd be an article about a man who "carried a sidearm openly while President Kennedy was visiting Dallas." TruthGal (talk) 08:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability is determined by substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. And as far as people caring, it's not only a big story in the U.S., but being carried internationally. Here's a Chicago Tribune column form one hour ago, a Canadian news story from six hours ago , and a Zimbabwe news story from 10 hours ago. Yet it happened more than a week ago. But you're welcome to cover your ears if you don't want to hear about it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 08:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The articles you cite do an even better job making my case for Delete than I did. Both mention a man identified as "Chris" who also brought a gun to an event that was so far away from the President, he was never in any danger. By your logic, "Chris" is notable and thus warrants his own entry in Wikipedia because he's mentioned in multiple news sources. When, might I ask, will you be getting around to creating the entry for "Chris"? TruthGal (talk) 09:15, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, the article mention Chris as being a more recent example of the phenomenon. So now we see that perhaps a merge to the organization that both belong to makes sense. All it took was a little time. There's no rush. It's a notable phenomenon, we just have to figure out how and where it's appropriate to include it, instead of running around like chickens with our heads cut off trying to delete things we don't fully understand the signifance of. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:43, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Openly carrying a gun in New Hampshire is legal. Citizens in states that allow carrying firearms in public tend to do just that, so I respectfully disagree that this is a "phenomenon" much less a notable one. TruthGal (talk) 06:10, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:BLP1E. Epbr123 (talk) 12:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP: not news. not notable Capitalismojo (talk) 17:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as textbook WP:BLP1E, which hopefully will be applied correctly this time around. Tarc (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable outside of the context of one news cycle. CorpITGuy (talk) 18:40, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete completely unnotable news event of the day. As noted, this is a textbook WP:BLP1E. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 03:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Absolutely no notability, he just got lots of news coverage one day for doing something stupid. Reywas92 Talk  21:07, 25 August 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.