Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiwi Alejandro Camara

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 of the debate was delete. It's pretty clear to me that the article itself focused on nothing but the fact that he made racial slurs in class outlines he posted on a website. I'm not prejudiced against recreation of a more encyclopediac version of the articlem, or creation of an article regarding the "controversy," but it all seems pretty weak to me.  RasputinAXP  c 20:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kiwi Alejandro Camara

The notability of the person in this article is suspect. As of the most current edit, this article does not fit Wikipedia notability criteria (see Wikipedia:Notability (people)).

There are only three unique points in the article:

• He graduated early from Harvard Law School with a fellowship.
• He wrote an arguably offensive article.
• He coaches high school debate at Mountain View High School.

Many people coach high school debate, some graduate early, and others let the word nigger slip out on accident. More than half of the article has to do with how Camara pissed people off. Not only is this article uncited, but one of its important external links are "humorous video at debate practice."

Crzrussian suggested that Camara's status as a former John M. Olin fellow in law and economics at Harvard is grounds for notability as a fellow is basically a junior professor; however, this is a misunderstanding. As evidenced by Wikipedia's article on the John_M._Olin_Foundation, the foundation gives a grant to fellows at universities, including Harvard. Now that the confusion regarding the "John M. Olin" moniker is out of the way, let us examine what a fellow really is.

According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition [1], a fellow at a university would be a graduate student appointed to a position granting financial aid and providing for further study. This means that a fellow can hardly be equated to a college professor of any sort- they are just not the same thing.

Furthermore, Jahiegel has argued that the publicity surrounding the racial conflict at Harvard and Yale would be grounds for notability and would merit an evolution of the article into that incident. However, I contend that publicity is not enough to substantiate importance of subject based on two premises:

• Anyone can be subjected to publicity for any reason, good or bad. To set a precedent of writing articles based on the subject's publicity would be writing millions of articles about people who are potentially not notable. So, if there was any way for us to assume that publicity is a notability factor here, we would also have to assume that:
• The reason why Camara's publicity would be notable is because he himself is already important. However, I have already disproven this assertion in the first half of this nomination.

Camara himself is not notable enough, which logically means that the publicity surrounding him is not notable either. Consequently, this article should be deleted. Big.P (talk • contribs) 04:43, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep 1. Involvement in a major flap over the allegations of racism covered in many major newspapers, as the article states. 2. Fellowship (like a junior professorship) at Stanford Law School. 3. Work published by the Yale Law Journal, the nation's preeminent law review. Ladies and gentlemen, this person meets WP:BIO with gusto. Also, article has been here awhile, edited by many people. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 04:45, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• You suggest that Camara's status as a former John M. Olin fellow in law and economics at Harvard is grounds for notability as a fellow is basically a junior professor; however, this is a misunderstanding. As evidenced by Wikipedia's article on the John_M._Olin_Foundation, the foundation gives a grant to fellows at universities, including Harvard. Now that the confusion regarding the "John M. Olin" moniker is out of the way, let us examine what a fellow really is.

• According to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition [2], a fellow at a university would be a graduate student appointed to a position granting financial aid and providing for further study. This means that a fellow can hardly be equated to a college professor of any sort- they are just not the same thing. -- Big.P (talk • contribs) 05:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep Notable as a child prodigy although the criteria over at the c.p. article page is 12 years old. also for junior proferssoship. Also, Wikipedia:Notability is a guideline 'not policy'. Notable(slightly?) as the youngest Harvard law graduate.--Jondel 05:14, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• He is not a junior professor. A fellow has nothing to do with professorship. This dictionary page[3] and this Wikipedia article disagree that fellow=professor. -- Big.P (talk • contribs) 05:24, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Graduating from law school at a very young age does not clear the notability bar. Coaching high school debate certainly does not clear the notability bar. This person's strongest claim to notability is having caused a little controversy because he used some offensive racial terms. Even if the media coverage of the controvery can be verified, that's just not very remarkable. I see nothing notable about this person. --Hyperbole 06:35, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per long winded reasoning of nom. DarthVader 14:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I differ with Crz to the extent that I do not think Camara to be notable as an academic (per WP:PROFTEST), and to the extent that I am disinclined to think him notable in view of his having graduated at a young age from HLS. Nevertheless, the controversy surrounding his prospective YLR publication, and the media coverage such controversy received, likely seems to confer notability. Notwithstanding WP:NBD, I see nothing in this situation to distinguish Camara from Kristi Yamaoka, whom we've found to be notable. On the Yamaoka nomination, I supported "delete", believing that "where a personnage is notable only in view of his/her tie to a specific incident, our article ought to focus on the incident (as against on the person)"; I thought, then, that the Yamaoka article ought to be retitled and refocused on the incident writ large. Here, though, because the incident and person are wholly inextricable, because and where a singular person is the main participant in an incident, I am inclined to think that we ought to have an article apropos of the person; in either case, the event/person is notable. Joe 15:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Camara was already notable as a child prodigy, see this link. :) --Noypi380 11:59, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Interesting controversial story = an article Wikipedia was designed to house. 12:01, 3 May 2006(UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.242.187.243 (talk • contribs) .

*Strong Delete Wikipedia isn't some news organization- the controversy isn't that notable. Lots of people are smart, but it is their accomplishments that define them. I see none mentioned in the article, so let's vamoose with it. -- 71.132.154.106 23:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppet arbitration will decide whether or not this vote is legitimate, not CrazyRussian, who isn't even so much an administrator. -- ßίζ·קּ‼ (talk | contribs) 23:28, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete Wikipedia isn't a medium to ruin someone's professional career at this young age--the Yale controversy is only mudslinging, and is not newsworthy at all. I live a few miles away from Camara and i never got to know of it till now. -- 71.132.154.106 23:17, 3 May 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.170.237.109 (talk • contribs). (this was the second edit from this IP address). - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 11:42, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Number of edits from an ambiguous IP does not indicate experience on Wikipedia. Maybe the user forgot to sign in, or their IP changed as a result of ISP, like mine does. Then again, you wouldn't understand. -- ßίζ·קּ‼ (talk | contribs) 03:06, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

See User talk:71.132.154.106 where anon admits to being Big.P, the nominator. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 05:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

I have opened a sockpuppetry case against User:Big.p based on this AfD.

NOTE. I have moved the unrelated conversation over to User_talk:Big.P#Conversation from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiwi Alejandro Camara moved here. ←Humus sapiens ^ну? 09:20, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

HI. Sorry about the sockpuppetry case or whatever, crazyrussian you can close it, i have no effin clue how to use this talk page but i wanted to voice my opinion and i screwed up the edits while commenting -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.170.237.109 (talk • contribs).

• Delete Notability not established. Runcorn 11:35, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Thanks for relisting, I was meaning to put in my .02. I think he is notable for his age at graduation from Harvard Law School (his Olin fellowship aside). As an aside, the Google Video link on his page is priceless. -- Samir (the scope) धर्म 08:40, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

• Weak keep. Being a graduate at 14 is not notable, 'coaching' debate at a secondary school in the US is not notable, making a racist comment is certainly not notable. However; I agree with deleting errant nonsense from Wikipedia, I agree with deleting advertising from Wikipedia and I agree with deleting vanity articles. This one fails each test. Markb 13:20, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete. This article focuses almost exclusively on the racial-slur issue, and is clearly designed solely for the POV purpose of calling attention to it. I see nothing about him that passing notability guidelines anyway. wikipediatrix 16:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:BIO. He's just some guy who pissed off a lot of people via the internet. If that's a criterion for inclusion, I should get my own article. Brian G. Crawford 20:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
• Message I'm not voting but I think the nominator should strongly consider this policy WP:CIV. OSU80 00:30, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

If you are concerned with my behavior, please leave anything regarding this outside of the AfD nomination and refer to my talk page instead. Thanks. -- ßίζ·קּ‼ (talk | contribs) 06:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment What is the criteria for notability as a child prodigy? If defined too broadly, many don't ammount to much. JeffBurdges 11:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
• keep please this child prodigy is notable Yuckfoo 01:08, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

• keep. Here's what we know about the Olin Fellowship on Law and Economics at Harvard:

'..during the first eleven years of the Program, thirty-two John M. Olin Student Research Fellowships have been awarded to advanced graduate students for the general support of their training in law and economics.In addition, 104 Student Research Fellowships have been awarded to students to support specific research projects during the summer.' Also, we dont have articles on everyone who published a comment in the Yale Law Review. (If we did, I would have had a lot of fun writing some of them.) Fails WP:Proftest completely. Also, Prodigy-Schomidigy.

However: the controversy was certainly notable. At the time, there was a long article in the New Yorker that discussed both this and the Ward Churchill affair, treating them as if they were of equal importance. It has also been brought up time and again in the past year when people were discussing Larry Summers and his comments on women in the sciences. Ideally, I would support moving this to a page specifically dealing with the controversy.' Hornplease 08:21, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Based on the reasoning for your vote, would you support a deletion of this article and the creation of a new one that centers around the controversy? -- ßίζ·קּ‼ (talk | contribs) 05:17, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

That is correct. Hornplease 12:06, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Graduating from Harvard (or any university for that matter) at such a young age is a notable achievement, despite the sniping from some here (jealous much?). -- Jalabi99 14:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Brian G. Crawford. ForbiddenWord 16:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep It appears that the controversy is more notable than the individual.--Adrift* 17:46, 15 May 2006 (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.