Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Granville

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. John254 01:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] John Granville

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

No claims of notability for this individual, except for his murder. However even his murder does not create notability (it has been reported in the media, but plenty of murders are reported). If this is finally "proved" to be "terrorism" rather than just murder, there may be a future claim to notability, but even being the victim of terrorism is not a clear claim to notability. HookOnTheWall (talk) 03:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• Weak keep. If the New York Times covers your murder, you're notable. Unfortunately you're also dead, but that's another issue altogether. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 04:01, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep for now Since this is created shortly, I think we should give editors time to expand the article. It receives media coverage and is notable. Chris! _ct 04:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. I'm inclined to keep, not just because it was in the NYT, but also because he was a diplomat, so it has that "international incident" side to it. Whether it's "terrorism" is a semantic issue and not relevant to the deletion (though of course we can report debate on this). Superm401 - Talk 04:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment. I've tried to reform the article into more of a proper biography, though this is difficult because details of his career aren't really available. Superm401 - Talk 05:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment "forming a proper biography" is not always what we need to do; in this case, the event of his death is what is notable. Some people believe we must change the article title (e.g. Murder of John Granville) but this isn't my favored position unless it's the only way to keep an article, as I believe current policy dictates proper article form in any case. --Dhartung | Talk 01:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• keep for now, and yes, a deliberately killed US official is a clear claim to notability. Chris (クリス) (talk) 05:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Weak keep per Realkyhick.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 08:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep I don't know why terrorism requires scare quotes. A murdered diplomat is notable by any standards, wars have been started over less. Nick mallory (talk) 09:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• Perhaps this and this might clarify the use of the quotes for you. As for a murdered diplomat always been notable, doesn't it depend somewhat on what the person is involved with? This gentleman seems to have simply worked on aid projects for USAID in the employ of the US government, rather than being a diplomat involved say defence or foreign policy. Anybody who negotiates could be called a diplomat, but this seems to be a stretch. If he had been the US Ambassador, then war might be a vague possibility, but this guy was securing radios for poor people (no direspect to him or his work). HookOnTheWall (talk) 01:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep For Now, but being it back here if it turns out that he was just the victim of a random bungled robbery or something. If it's targeted terrorism, then it certainly is notable. Lankiveil (talk) 11:58, 2 January 2008 (UTC).
• Keep, his work on behalf of poor Sudanese is notable and will be more so ifit was terrorism. Mikebar (talk) 12:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

• How can working on behalf of poor people provide notability? Thousands, if not millions, or people work to help the poor. HookOnTheWall (talk) 01:58, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

• Keep. He was an American diplomat. He was killed under unusual (possible terrorism) circumstances. Publicus 14:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:BLP1E. If he wasn't notable before his murder, being murdered is not grounds for an article. And I really want to address "If the New York Times covers your murder, you're notable". Are you aware of how many murders are covered in the NYT daily? To suggest that that's a keep criterion is bizarre. Corvus cornix_talk 18:49, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • If it was terrorism (they are still investigating), then it is more notable (lots of examples in WP), and if it was a political statement even more so. See Khartoum diplomatic assassinations as an example. Some time will tell. Mikebar (talk) 19:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
  • As of 1/5, it was claimed that it was terrorism so there are multiple precidents Mikebar (talk) 07:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep, clearly a notable event more than a notable person. --Dhartung | Talk 01:33, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
  • Then the article needs a new name and to stop claiming that it's a biography. Corvus cornix_talk 17:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry, but that's sophistry. The article is encyclopedic. Being in a different form than you prefer is not a reason for deletion, nor anything of great urgency. Have at it. --Dhartung | Talk 01:20, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Not sophistry in the least. This is not a biography, and therefore should not be at John Granville. If kept, it should be at Murder of John Granville, since that's what it's about. Corvus cornix_talk 21:52, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh really? read this (from the main article):

[edit] Career

Granville grew up in Buffalo, New York. He was a graduate Canisius High School in 1993 and of Fordham University. In 2003, he graduated from Clark University with an Master of Arts degree in International Development and Social Change. He studied as a Fulbright Fellow in Africa. After school, Granville joined the Peace Corps and was sent to Cameroon for two years.

As a diplomat, Granville worked for the United States Agency for International Development in Kenya and Sudan. In his current assignment, he led a project to provide residents in South Sudan with 75,000 radios that could be powered by a crank generator or solar panels. The project was part of the preparations for the upcoming 2009 elections in South Sudan.^[1]

"He told his mom several times ... that it's dangerous, what he's doing, but he wouldn't want to be doing anything else," said U.S. Rep. Brian Higgins, who spoke with Granville's mother, Jane Granville, after her son's death. ^[2]

• Keep Diplomats are usually notable, and his death only enhaced that. Lee Harvey Oswald, Tim McVeigh, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold are only notable for one thing. Besides, I think the event looks better under this title. Editorofthewiki (talk) 22:51, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. I'm a casual reader. I looked him up in Wikipedia -- the encyclopedia would be deficient without an entry. Perhaps refile under a larger event as the story evolves (e.g., under Ansar al-Tawhid if the murderers becomes prominent). 128.2.134.31 (talk) 09:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy keep and put an end to this waste of time. RFerreira (talk) 06:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
  • WP:CIVIL. Corvus cornix_talk 22:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
    • How is he being uncivil? He just called it aa waste of time based on my above evidence. Which it is if you dare to look. Editorofthewiki (talk) 23:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] References

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.