Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Granata

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 keep, early close due to obvious consensus. Given the current visibility of articles related to the shooting, keeping this AfD open any longer isn't going to do any good. Sandstein 23:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kevin Granata

Kevin Granata (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Similar to other articles about people who were killed in this horrible event, he is only notable for his death. └Jared┘┌talk┐  16:18, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

To the contrary, Granata was one of the top researchers throughout the USA in his field.[1] Check Wikipedia:Notability (academics): he passes at least the first two. Nyttend 16:22, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Let me clarify. There wouldn't have been an article about him had he not died. It's unfortunate but true. └Jared┘┌talk┐  16:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
There's nothing on Granata in that article anymore. Gdo01 16:37, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Per this Washington Post article, Granata was "one of the top five biomechanics researchers in the country" according to his department head. NawlinWiki 17:01, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Just because there wasn't an article on him before, doesn't mean he doesn't qualify under WP:PROF. The question isn't whether the article was written because of the tragedy or not, it's whether he qualifies under notability criterion. Sasquatch t|c 17:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The article does not have cited references asserting his notability. Without that, he is only known for being a shooting victim. This is not enough to justify an entire article, only mention in a list of victims for the shooting. StuffOfInterest 16:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Allow some time to establish RS, he seems to meet WP;PROF -- febOBJECTION! 16:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, meets WP:PROF categories 1 and 2. NawlinWiki 17:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - "He was one of the top five biomechanics researchers in the country working on movement dynamics in cerebral palsy" [1] Clemwang 17:09, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. See comments above. Sasquatch t|c 17:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, as I said before, since I guess I didn't officially say "keep" Nyttend 17:14, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. While I don't think he quite matches up with with the credentials of Liviu Librescu it would seem that he does meet the criteria for WP:PROF. --Stubbleboy 17:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep "There wouldn't have been an article about him had he not died" is just a testament to how sucky Wikipedia is on dealing of people who have little pop-culture appeal.--T. Anthony 17:21, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. He isn't notable. People need to think before they make pages. Titanium Dragon 17:27, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I agree with the above sentiments of Anthony. I've seen many professors that are very notable and don't have an article. There are many profs that meet the notability test that Wikipedia does not have articles on. I've created articles on some of these, but there are many that are unrepresented. Sure, he wouldn't have had an article yet if he hadn't been so tragically killed. But he probably would have had an article eventually. ETA: He had 67 publications in journals according to his own site[2]. -Gloriamarie 17:28, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Easily passes WP:PROF as per NawlinWiki. --Falcorian (talk) 17:48, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. -- Pete.Hurd 17:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Passes WP:PROF, per NawlinWiki. CloudNine 17:50, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep I agree with T. Anthony and Stubbleboy above. LinguistAtLarge 18:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Passes WP:PROF. I also would like to see this AFD closed early, noting the overwhelming support for keeping the article. Pablothegreat85 19:17, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment - It is starting to look a lot like WP:SNOW, and that's coming from someone who actually voted delete. --StuffOfInterest 19:36, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep While the article was probably created hastily because of his link to the incident, the fact is that he seems to qualify under WP:PROF. fuzzy510 19:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Meets WP:PROF. Yaf 19:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and next time do some research out of respect for the recently deceased, this person obviously meets the Wikipedia:Notability (academics) guidelines. Close this now, please. Burntsauce 19:40, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment The research is up to the people adding content in, it has nothing to do with respect. If you want to put something in there you need to support why it should be in there. It is not up to all of us to be your fact checker. --StuffOfInterest 19:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
      • Bullshit, take a look at the article prior to it being nominated. [3] Notability was clearly established with a positive head start on reliable sources. Burntsauce 19:59, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
        • Comment This nomination does appear to be in good faith. Let's try to be civil here. I realize that this country has had a particular brutal couple of days and that it's very easy to get emotional, but let's try to keep a cool head. Again, I suggest very strongly that this AfD be closed early, as the AfD is starting to become emotional and there is such a large consensus for keeping the article. Pablothegreat85 20:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep His credentials appear to satisfy WP:PROF. He has a respectable list of articles published in refereeed journals, and a good history of funded research. However, his department head praising him in the aftermath must be taken as a eulogy rather than an objective independent evaluation, and he had only achieved Associate Professor status. When he was murdered in mid-career he had a very bright future. Edison 19:57, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Satisfies the criteria for notability. Cheers, Lankybugger ○ Yell ○ 20:16, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, meet Wikipedia:Notability (academics). --Neo-Jay 20:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per the other keeps. Acalamari 20:20, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, seems to pass WP:PROF, and his tragic death makes him even more notable. bbx 20:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Whether this article was created as a result of the VTech shooting is irrelevant to AfD. What is relevant is whether Granata fulfills the requirements of WP:V, WP:BIO and WP:PROF. He does. Would an article containing such sourced assertions have been remotely in danger of failing AfD a week ago?  RGTraynor  20:26, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. The previous comment pointing to WP:PROF seems relevant enough to warrant keeping the Granata article on Wikipedia. Furthermore, as the editor of multiple academic journals, one day this article will link into other articles. MCalamari 20:43, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - unbelievable request. One of the Top-Scientists of his profession in the USA, a Professor. Dear en:WP - as long as TV-Episodes get their own article, should a professor get his article. Marcus Cyron 20:55, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - ridiculous. Of course you keep this. Not only is his research widely published (>60 articles as an Associate is pretty good) the idea that you would delete him because he was shot down approaches offensive. ljean 21:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Passes WP:PROF and is notable. I stand by RGTraynor's comments. — † Webdinger BLAH | SZ 22:19, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep It would not be up for AfD if it was not just created. WP:PROF... --wpktsfs 22:24, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Per NawlinWiki at al. Deusnoctum 22:31, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep yes WP:Not a memorial... but this professor was notable BEFORE his death... his death in this manner just adds more publicity/attention to him.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 22:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per wpktsfs and many others, and let it snow. EliminatorJR Talk 22:51, 17 April 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.