Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chelsea Dawn Gerlach

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 merge to Operation Backfire (FBI), which seems to have been done already. Although the consensus is not entirely clear, this seems to be most in keeping with WP:BLP1E and would address most arguments made here. Sandstein (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chelsea Dawn Gerlach

Chelsea Dawn Gerlach (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Negative BLP for single-non-notable crime. Sources all discuss crime. Not seeing lasting notability. MBisanz talk 10:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:BLP1E, not otherwise notable KleenupKrew (talk) 11:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge & Redirect salient details to Earth Liberation Front. Black Kite 14:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. —Hiding T 15:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Earth Liberation Front as failing notability. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. The crime is relatively notable (though likely not enough for a separate article), but the criminal as an individual is not. If a whole article on this individual in a reliable, national publication were cited, I would begin to reconsider. Nick Graves (talk) 19:31, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge to ELF. The information here is probably worth keeping as a bullet point or two in that article. Bfigura (talk) 23:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep multiple major crimes, significant "environmental protection" arsonist. There was a single trial on multiple counts of destrucction of unrelated facilities in several different states. Not ONEEVENTDGG (talk) 01:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Multiple events and can't merge into one article since she was a player in two organizations as well as the FBI program to capture her. She has internal links to three articles. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:02, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per Richard Arthur Norton . Edison (talk) 03:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not every perp deserves a fan page on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.6.157.14 (talk) 14:04, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • keep per Arthur and DGG. This isn't BLP1E. JoshuaZ (talk) 14:46, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:06, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Question: I still only see one event mentioned in the article. Multiple crimes, certainly, but all part of the same spree. What am I missing? Nick Graves (talk) 03:08, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: -- Richard Arthur Norton merged this into Operation Backfire (FBI) several days ago. I completed the process by placing a redirect in the original article. -- Tom Ketchum 18:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge -- I suppose the above makes me vote this way -- Tom Ketchum 18:45, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Support Merge to the Operation Backfire article. WP:NOT#NEWS is pretty clear. Tarc (talk) 19:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
  • As of now, the article only contains materials about the crime; there is no biographical info or at least some expected info about activities as an environmentalist (I'm also unable to find any online sources about this). So, merge and redirect to Operation Backfire (FBI), which is fitting better than the organizations' articles since she is associated with two as pointed out above. Should new references (about the person) come up in the future, we may discuss resurrecting the page then; right now, it is only an events-article, not a biography. --PeaceNT (talk) 14:50, 1 May 2008 (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.