Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe McCain

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 keep, sources have been listed here which demonstrate notability. Canley (talk) 04:39, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joe McCain

Joe McCain (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Procedural nomination for {{db-bio}} speedy request I've just declined. Article's subject appears to be the brother of US Senator John McCain, though as has been commonly noted in other deletion debates, notability is not necessarily inherited. Relevant comments at Talk:Joe McCain. Thoughts, anybody? – Luna Santin (talk) 00:04, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maya_Soetoro-Ng That article sets a precident. Stinkyandthebrain (talk) 00:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
• Keep in light of evidence of independant notability found by Edison. Ryan Paddy (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC) Merge to John McCain. Delete have searched Google news, books, etc and can't find any evidence of notability in his own right. That Boston.com article is entirely about being an otherwise unnotable brother of a presidential candidate. "Precident" of other articles existing is not a valid argument against deletion on Wikipedia. If those articles are about subjects with as little evidence of notability as this, they should be nominated for deletion too. Please provide evidence that Joe McCain is notabile independantly of his brother (i.e. he has attracted media attention in his own right, not as brother of a candidate) if you wish this article to remain. Ryan Paddy (talk) 00:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Your requirement of notability independent of the notable relative does not agree with Wikipedia:Notability (people) which says that relatives of famous persons, who themselves have coverage, are notable. The coverage does not have to be completely independent of the notable relative. It just has to be substantial (more than a passing reference or directory listing) and in independent and reliable sources. Edison (talk) 15:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment It says "unless significant coverage can be found". I don't consider coverage on the lines of "let's take a look at a notable person's relative" to be significant. Journalists shop around famous people's friends and relatives for easy articles that will interest people based on "gossip factor", not on the notability or interest value of the subject themselves. If a journalist interviews a famous person's mother asking "what's it like being this famous person's mother?" then they haven't been noted in their own right, so the spirit of notability isn't fulfilled. Ryan Paddy (talk) 00:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• Keep There are over a thousand articles about him [1] and again there is an article about Obama's sister (and she's just a half sister). Stinkyandthebrain (talk) 01:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment Those aren't articles, they are search hits. Of the ten hits on the first page, only one is a news article in a Reliable source, and it's the one we already know about talking about him as brother of a candidate. The other 8 are web blogs, forum posts, and the Wikipedia article under discussion. As several people have pointed out to you, the existence of similar articles means nothing. Wikipedia does not work on precidence. It works on policies, guidelines, and common sense. Ryan Paddy (talk) 04:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Keep there are enough articles. Some seem to be interpreting non-inherited as if it prohibited article on people when they were notable individually, but the ultimate source of the notability was because of a relationship of some sort. I don't think we should analyze to that extent, just see if there is individual notability, regardless of why the public is interested in a person. DGG (talk) 02:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment Where are these articles? I see one: this. Everything else is blogs, forums posts, a single line on a political profile of his brother, etc. Please provide evidence of notability. One fluff piece doesn't cut it, especially when the writer of that fluff piece specifically states that the only reason Joe attracts any attention (e.g. business offers) is being brother of John. There are only a few lines worth of reliable stuff of interest to say about Joe, and they can fit in John's article. Ryan Paddy (talk) 04:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Response I find 267, including a fair number that pre-date 1996 and John's participation in a number of elections. I think he's independently notable, what do you see 'wrong' with these? _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 04:30, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Please point to specific articles that establish independant notability. The majority of those articles are about different Joe McCains. Of the few that are about this Joe McCain, most mention him in passing as being involved in his brother's 2000 campaign, and one that I saw mentions an actor by this name in passing in a play review - but the review is not about the actor, it's about the play. There is a lot of Googley hand-waving going on in this AfD, the criteria for notability seem to have suddenly slackened. Please link to specific articles that make your case. Ryan Paddy (talk) 21:39, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Keep, agreeing mainl with DGG and Stinky, although I don't think Obama's half sister having an article is relevant. Regardless of why people care about him, he's notable enough to have been covered in multiple reliable sources. This coverage is enough to work from to generate an article, which has been done here. He isn't notable solely for being John McCain's brother, but being his brother doesn't prevent him from being notable per Wikipedia standards _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 03:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment See Wikipedia:Notability_(people)#Invalid_criteria. This guideline states "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A);". There is not significant coverage on A (Joe), only incidental coverage as a relative of B (John). Any material on Joe should be merged into John McCain. Ryan Paddy (talk) 04:16, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

• Merge to John McCain. The main source used for this article is titled "McCain brother stays out of spotlight". And, in fact, Joe has received minimal attention during this election season. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:33, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 17:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
• Keep there is sufficient sources available for WP:BIO purposes. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 18:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per above. There are many reliable sources on the topic as shown by a simple google search. He has notable accomplishments other than being John McCain's brother, as shown on these pages. His article does nreed an expansion. Frank Anchor ^{Talk to me} (R-OH) 19:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - non-notable actor. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:42, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
• Keep notable actor NewYork483 (talk) 04:31, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment Notability as an actor has not been demonstrated. Please link to specific sources demonstrating that Joe is notable as an actor per WP:ENTERTAINER. Or notable in any other regard. Ryan Paddy (talk) 04:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

• Redirect to John McCain; too short to merge, and not notable without his brother Sceptre ^(talk) 15:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. Notability is not inherited, and the main source is an article whose title says he stays out of the spotlight, which alone is more than sufficient grounds to delete. KleenupKrew (talk) 12:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
• Keep I originally speedily deleted the article because it was unreferenced and had WP:BLP issues due to unreferenced statements about Joe McCain's personal life in the first posted version. But the principle that relatives of politicians are not inherently notable certainly does not mean that they are inherently NON-notable. Also, I believe that the precedent of what has been kept and what has been deleted in AFD actually does provide guidance for future AFDs: We have kept several articles about relatives of world leaders or political candidates who are notable only as a result of their famous relative, but who have substantial coverage in multiple reliable and independent sources, thus satisfying WP:N. There is no requirement that this coverage be completely unrelated to the career of their politician relative. For Joe McCain, there are numerous article in newspapers over at least the past 37 years, long before McCain was a political candidate. There is coverage of Joe McCain sitting in a bamboo cage in Los Angeles, eating simulated POW food to dramatize the plight of POWs, as printed in The Independent (Long Beach, CA) Nov. 27, 1970. There is "In behalf of POWs, will ask 'doves' to sign petition" (Associated Press, December 31, 1970) as printed in Florence (SC) Morning News, Dec. 31, 1970, page 1 (via NewspaperArchive.com (subscription). This is a feature story about Joe McCain and two other brothers of POWs travelling around the US circulating petitions to be presented to North Vietnamese representatives. There is a 86 word passage about him in "Powerful Virginia Machine Digs In to Tackle McCain," By Francis X. Clines, The New York Times, February 25, 2000. See "MCCAIN WILL PRESS CAMPAIGN TO REFORM GOP, BROTHER SAYS" March 8, 2000, by Tom Ernst, The Buffalo News which has substantial coverage of Joe McCain, partly behind paywall. See "Brother on Board; Joe McCain Isn't Steering the Campaign, But He's Proud to Be in the Back Seat" by Frank Ahrens, The Washington Post, February 3, 2000. which is certainly a story in a major newspaper devoted to Joe McCain. "WORLD VIEWS: U.S. losing friends over torture" Edward M. Gomez, special to SF Gate (San Francisco Chronicle), November 15, 2005 has 126 words about Joe McCain on the Abu Ghraib torture scandal and his brother. The 2008 Boston Globe article "McCain brother stays out of spotlight. But writing makes impact on Internet" Boston Globe, March 7, 2008 is already included in the article as a reference . "McCain, a supporter of Israel with a 'Judeophile' brother " in Haaretz, Feb 22, 2008 has several paragraphs about Joe McCain's support for Israel. "Theater;Falling in Love With Love ;At GALA, Garcia Lorca's..." Washington Post, Feb 4, 1991 talks about an actor named Joe McCain, but it is behind paywall so it takes further research to see if it is this Joe McCain, who is said to be an actor. Edison (talk) 15:49, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Comment I don't agree with "reflected notability" being sufficient for a subject to have its own article. Coverage of subjects with second-hand can usually fit easily within the article on the subject that is primarily notable. Joe McCain is a case in point, as there isn't enough to say about him to make a good article. However you've also mentioned several items of coverage that seem relatively independant of his brother's notability. So will change my opinion to keep. Ryan Paddy (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

• Keep per Edison. This article now meets WP:N after the sources that Edison found. Razorflame 16:05, 23 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.