Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Howard Johnson II

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 No consensus to delete, at least not for a discussion where the primary reason for deletion is notability. For cases such as these where the subject's notability is borderline and solely due to another article-worthy subject (507th Maintenance Company), merge is often the best solution; discuss on Talk page. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-19 11:14Z

[edit] Howard Johnson II

Howard Johnson II (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Private Jonhson, of the US Army, is one of the three thousand plus soldiers who died in Iraq. However, some believe that just him belonging in the 507 Maintenance Unit, the same unit as Jessica Lynch and the first female KIA since Vietnam. For those using the Google test, his name will appear in many locations, mostly due to many websites either being dedicated to the 507th or to listing the names of all Iraqi dead, US and collaition. My contention is that other than being killed in Iraq and part of a unit, he has not done anything else notable to warrant an article on Wikipedia. (Most of the content is about what happened at a memorial service, two medals presented and a park named after him). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

• Weak Keep, got a parked named after him etc... Mathmo ^Talk 16:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Many killed war veterans has something named afterthem in their neighboorhoods, just a memorial, nothing special. Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Weak delete. Just being killed in action is not enough to establish notability. Other than memorial references, supplied references are incidental mentions. Bronze Star may meet notability criterion. Αργυριου (talk) 00:14, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, First soldier from Alabama killed in OIF. The Governor of Alabama attended his funeral along with a US Congressman and Senator. Eulogized on the floor on the US Senate. Name not only appears on standard listings of OIF dead but twice in the Congressional Record and Alabama Congressman Joe Bonner's website. He is also in Jessica Lynch's book as well as Richard S. Lowry's book Marines in the Garden of Eden. The City of Mobile and the Alabama legislature have both passed resolutions honoring him. If the 2,000 death in OIF/OEF can have a Wikipeda page why not Howard Johnson II? Ehrentitle 00:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

  If I'd seen an AfD on the 2000th casualty, I'd have probably voted to delete that one too, unless there was something particularly notable about him, Being #2000 would not be enough for me. Αργυριου (talk) 01:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Weak keep the first casualty in a major battle, being mentioned on the senate floor and in a state Senate Joint Resolution seems to meet the minimum of notability needed.--John Lake 00:50, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

He was the first one to be killed in this engagement Category:American Iraq War killed in action and is at least as notable as some of them for all it's worth.--John Lake 01:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, the article requires clean up and has many NPOV issues, however, per WP:BIO he is the recipient of several awards including the Purple Heart. According to Wikipedia this makes him notable, so I don't see how you can say he's not when its pretty black and white what Wikipedia's policy is on awards of notability. Mkdw^talk 03:40, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The purple heart isn't a big deal, every soldier who was killed and wounded in Iraq got one or in any war after 1917 so hundreds of thousands has/had one, my economics teacher got one in Vietnam for being shot there, is he notable for wikipedia, no, most of the notabilty that Johnson has was because he was the first soldier killed from Alabama or in that battle period also and being mentioned on the senate only because he was being killed, very weak claim of notabilty Delete as for the several awards part of WP:BIO that has to be written as right now almost every war veteran would meet it Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - satisfies notability requirements in my book. Philippe Beaudette 04:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

How? Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Satisfies notability. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 04:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Mathmo. i kan reed 05:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Abstain Koptor 12:39, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • This is NOT a vote, this is a discussion to reach a consensus. If you have something to contribute to the discussion, do so. Otherwise, why waste your time?--Aervanath 17:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as wikipedia is not a memorial and this is not a particularly notable case. MLA 13:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Delete there is nothing notable about this person. Everyone dies, millions die in war, year after year worldwide, there is no reason each of them should get an article.A mcmurray 14:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Dying in battle seems not truly enough, not even the first one to die from a US state. Arnoutf 14:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment, notability can only be asserted by references, this article lacks them. On the other hand, being reported about in multiple non-trivial articles, which this case obviously has, automatically asserts notability. Not using my standard sentence because of the sensitivities involved Alf photoman 14:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete He's a soldier who died in the line of duty. Sad but not notable, that's what soldiers do. Jcuk 14:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per Jaranda. Does have NPOV issues, and a lack of sources. But I think he's notable, all the article needs is a decent clean-up. Ganfon 15:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I voted Delete Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 05:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Tragic to lose a life in war, but not inherently notable. Passing reference or trivial mention in a book or in a list read on the floor of the congress does not satisfy WP:N. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Other articles for nonnotable individuals do not require us to keep this one under the "pokemon test." 16:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)Edison
• Delete The article fails WP:NOT#INFO, although its an article about a soldier who is no longer here it does fail the above.Tellyaddict^{Editor review!} 16:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, though I express my sympathy to the family. This is basically an obit and Wikipedia is not the place for that. Notability is not met, IMHO. Fundamental Dan 17:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, as Purple Hearts are, alas, not notable. First KIA from the State of _____ is also not notable. Jessica Lynch had news coverage and controversy, as well as being a rarity in terms of a repatriated POW. The difference should be obvious. --Dhartung | Talk 18:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete truly tragic, but the deaths of soldiers are not inherently notable. Private Johnson was not a significant contributor to his field, not has he received multiple independent media articles covering him, as required by WP:BIO.-- danntm ^T _C 19:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Tragic yes, but so is every one of the 3,000+ deaths.--Bryson 21:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per the above - nothing to establish notability beyond having died, and the keep comments are all a little too close to WP:ILIKEIT territory ("seems notable to me" etc).-Dmz5*Edits**Talk* 21:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Article cannot be verified through the use of third-party sources at this time, because no external, independant sources are cited or provided. Also does not appear to meet the notability inclusion guideline for people, this may change if sources are provided. -- saberwyn 21:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep but only if references provided Normally I would say to delete this sort of article per WP:NOT#MEMORIAL. However, in reading the article, it looks like there are some as yet unreferenced (and therefore as yet unverified) accounts of the soldier being referenced by notable politicians and receiving various medals. If the facts of the article can be properly referenced and verified, then I'd be willing to keep it. Otherwise delete as an unreferenced memorial. Dugwiki 22:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Nom's reasons are cogent. A governor and senator or even vice president or President of the U.S. at your funeral is not, in itself enough, even combined with comments on the Senate floor. I don't see encyclopedic value in what would amount to an obituary for every dead soldier in Wikipedia, which would be the only fair way to handle all the rest of the deaths. We should have a Wikipedia policy on this, since it will surely come up again and again. Noroton 00:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. It's very sad, however Wikipedia is not a memorial. He was part of the 507 Maintenance Unit and much of the attention to the unit is based on the story surrounding Jessica Lynch. As tragic as it is, there are several thousand deaths in the war. He does not meet the criterea of WP:BIO --† Ðy§ep§ion † ^{Speak your mind} 03:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above comments, especially considering the firsts. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:49, 15 February 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.