Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick A. Kerry

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. Mailer Diablo 13:34, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Frederick A. Kerry

Not notable for himself, add info to Richard Kerry and/or John Kerry. Arniep 11:07, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - I don't believe that suicides by relatives of famous people are worthy of their own articles. Content can be merged into the famous people articles. Montco 15:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Nomination seems to be part of a campaign to delete category:Famous people's relatives who committed suicide by emptying the category. I'm convinced by Deiz's argument below that on this one, it's not that notable. So no objection here.--Mike Selinker 19:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Not at all, I nominated these as various other articles of relatives of famous people have been deleted and we need to decide whether just the fact that a person committed suicide but has not done anything really of note during their own life makes them notable enough for an encyclopedia article. Arniep 20:37, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

And I say NO. Delete. The El Reyko 21:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Campaign is a bit strong. The category advertises that it's subjects are not notable, and I was about to go through the category and nominate those which are indeed nn myself. It's called cleaning up/enforcing our guidelines and policies, not a "campaign". --kingboyk 22:21, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

The word "campaign" turns out to be more loaded than I intended. What I meant was, all of the articles were nominated at once (and, of course, in seven different spots), rather than determining the success of the category first. I'm not happy with that, as I'd rather not see a category used as the basis to delete an article. --Mike Selinker 04:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Worthy of a mention in his brother's article but I don't believe he's notable per WP:BIO. --kingboyk 22:21, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, completely nn save for famous descendants. Everything in this article is already mentioned at Richard Kerry. Mike Selinker, I'm confused - are you voting keep to make a point just because you're interpreting this as a bad-faith nomination, or because you have reason to believe that Frederick A. Kerry meets WP:BIO? The disputed category is entirely redundant, as committing suicide and being related to a famous person does not make for a WP article, that comes from at least being involved in a newsworthy suicide, a different criteria altogether, plus the cat authors have admitted it is designed to contain non-notable people, and that they hope the articles within it will be used to conduct original research. Deizio 22:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Um, I'm the category's author. You have inaccurately divined my "hopes." I created the category, after discussing it with User:Michael David, as a method of categorizing the existing articles.--Mike Selinker 04:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Um, doesn't answer my question. Do you personally believe that Frederick A. Kerry meets the criteria set out at WP:BIO? Deizio 10:53, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

You're asking whether I believe an article in a category defined as "non-notable people" passes a notability test? If it were part of a category called "The Kerrys" (as opposed to John Kerry), I'd vote to keep it in a heartbeat. Famous relations are fine with me, as it fleshes out the character of otherwise notable people.--Mike Selinker 15:01, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Mike, that's not how the project works. Individuals must satisfy the criteria at WP:BIO, regardless of which category they have been put in, who they are related to or the reasons behind the creation of their article or its nomination for deletion. Voting "keep" when you do not believe a subject is inherently notable is usually a violation of WP:POINT, especially when trying to "save" an article or category you have created or edited. Information on notable individuals (including important events involving family members which have a bearing on the individual's life) should be "fleshed out" on their own page. However, I'm sure you've figured all this out for yourself by now. Deizio 16:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I've been here for a while, Deiz, so among the things I've figured out for myself is that WP:BIO is a guideline, not policy. It's not the only reason an article might need separation from a main article. One reason might be to avoid clutter in a complex article. Another reason might be that the subject is not as significant as the main article. The notability test is one reason why you might believe an article should be deleted, but it isn't a reason that all users must follow for every article. Again, I didn't create any of these articles, but I think all (except maybe Daisy Keith, which is the stubbiest of stubs) are intriguing, and thus I vote to keep them (and thus try to categorize them in some useful way). Your mileage may vary.--Mike Selinker 19:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

But if they alone don't meet the likes of WP:BIO, then they don't merit an article of their own, so add their information to their notable relative's article. I'm not dismissing what you and Michael have identified as being pointless or uninteresting, but I don't think the framework of a general encyclopedia is the place to pursue it. Perhaps a third-party webpage or website linked to Wikipedia...?  Regards, David Kernow 16:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

BIO is indeed a guideline, and sometimes notable people don't fit, but I'm still wondering: what is the significance - or intrigue - of this piece? The suicide took place 22 years before John Kerry was born, and when Richard Kerry (who seems to have written one book and had a decent career as a diplomat) was six years old. If there was documented evidence that the event had affected the life of a notable person, this might be something. But there isn't, its still just a guy who killed himself and whose grandson would eventually run for President. There is is a very big difference between Fred Kerry and, for example, Cheyenne Brando, whose entire life was influenced by her relation to a celebrity, and whose newsworthy suicide has been linked to it. Mike, much love. Deizio 23:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Y'know, that's a very good point, Deiz. It's possible my interest in this one is influenced by Hannelore Kohl and Cheyenne Brando, which might be more interesting than this one. But this seems complete enough for at least me to be neutral on it. (Of course, I never want to delete any article.)--Mike Selinker 03:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Nothing sufficiently notable for a general encyclopedia in this life summary. David Kernow 01:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Somebody's grandfather? Not notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Herostratus (talk • contribs)
• Delete Relative of a notable individual is not sufficient to confer notabiliity. JoshuaZ 15:22, 18 April 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.