Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Carthy

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, without deciding the issue of whether the article is to be merged and redirected. John254 00:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Carthy

John Carthy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

• Keep but definitely review for NPOV. The sources seem verifiable and numerous, and if the Barr Tribunal (a related article that should be AfD if this is) is to be believed, anything that you spend 18M Euros investigating is probably worth at least a stub. People have been working on this article since July 06; this is the first question of its notability? Deltopia 17:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep and trim per Deltopia. I don't think it needs to go that in-depth and definitely needs to be edited for NPOV. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 19:41, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Barr Tribunal. We certainly don't need two articles and the government inquiry is more notable than the death itself. (But get that 19th century novelist photo out of there.) -- Dhartung | Talk 19:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Barr Tribunal as per Dhartung. Mountpottinger 22:23, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep since the subject does appear to be historically notable and the article is well referenced I see no valid reason presented for deletion. Personal motives of the author do not affect my interpretation of WP:N and similar guidelines. Burntsauce 22:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - it has 21 references. it should be getting an award not an AfD nom. MarsRover 01:20, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
• Speedy keep Article nominated by sockpuppet of banned editor. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 01:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect per Dhartung. Carthy has no notability apart from his death and the resulting inquiry. Clarityfiend 01:51, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Subject was the focus of intense non-trivial national media attention, as shown by the references in the article, and has thus surpassed the threshold of Notability - non-trivial coverage in several independent reliabel sources - many times over. Skomorokh ^incite 15:41, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect - The affair definitely should be in WP but a John Carthy article isn the right place for it. He isn't actually notable himself, but his death and the circumstances that led up to his death were. This is/should be covered in the Barr Tribunal article, not in an article about Carthy himself. ---- WebHamster 02:08, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
• Merge into Barr Tribunal, which was a specific investigation of this case. One article is enough. We'd normally prefer the impersonal heading, since the person has no notability otherwise. In any case, the amount of detail in here is disproportionate --kept or merged, it needs a sharp edit.DGG (talk) 09:06, 4 October 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.