Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Lue

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. John254 00:08, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lee Lue

Lee Lue (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Does not meet WP:BIO. It has been a stub since creation. What else is there to say about this person? Do we have an encyclopedia article for all good fighter pilots simply because they were good fighter pilots? There must be something notable about a particular pilot in order to deserve an article. Otherwise, how about articles on all the good jet fighter mechanics, or all the good (insert slippery slope arguement here). William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 16:12, 2 October 2007 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reasons:

Vang Sue (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)
  • Strong Keep - this article has grown since creation so that a misleading statement. The number of combat missions alone is notable. Can you show me someone who has flown more? And yes notable fighter pilots desire an article. You nominated two fighter pilots for deletion and mention we need to do this so no "mechanics" get articles. You seem to be making the slippery slope where there is none. --MarsRover 16:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - whoa...maybe we can tone this down a little. You may not have noticed that I didn't give an opinion to keep or delete. I simply brought the pages here for discussion. Also, I didn't say it hasn't been added to, I said it was created as a stub and still remains so. I still don't see what is so notable about this man...he had a job (fighter pilot), which he did well. Does that make him notable? If there isn't enough to write in order to get the article past the stub stage, isn't that, by definition, a non-notable subject? The number of combat missions flown is, at best, an asterisk in history, but, in my opinion, the man doesn't deserve an article in an acedemic encyclopedia.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 17:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I probably should have worded that better. My apologies. Military history is part of acedemeia just like all the pop culture articles. Some notable fighter pilots who lived and died during the Secret War might be useful to future generations. Sure its a small article but there are few Hmong biographies. And there will be even less if we delete these. --MarsRover 17:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The phrase "for flying more combat missions than any other pilot" makes him notable. Also, there are sources attached to the article to backup the claims within the article. --BlindEagletalk~contribs 17:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per this. The sentence "In his single-propeller T-28 fighter Lee Lue became the most important warrior in the CIA's secret Hmong army." certainly seems notable. He's described as "legendary" by the Washington Post. I'll put this article in and link to others later, as I'm stepping out.--Sethacus 17:18, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - I think you all are missing my point. The question is not whether "flying more combat missions..." is notable, the question is whether this man is notable. The part about the missions can be one sentence in an article about fighter pilots, but we don't need a permanantly stubbed article about the man. The actions are what are notable, not the man who performed them.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 17:22, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and Merge Lee Lue is notable for a variety of reasons, including number of missions and role as the most important pilot in Vang Pao's army during the Secret War. There is a good deal of information about him in Hamilton-Merritts' "Tragic Mountains" that could be included in the article (if others are inclined to add it). Also, just because an article hasn't moved beyond stub status as quickly as liked, it isn't a justification for deletion. Perhaps Vang Sue does not stand up to the notability test, but he could easily be merged into the Lee Lue article. Nposs 20:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Highly notable. If more details are wanted then go to it and research them. Deleting the article instead would be obtuse. Colonel Warden —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 21:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep there is no question that this meets WP:BIO and I hope the nominator can withdraw the nom. Burntsauce 22:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment by nominator - I see some more info has been added that establishes the notability of Lee Lue and that there appears to be more to him that just a good fighter pilot. However, I still maintain that Vang Sue should not be a stand-alone article. If we can merge Vang Sue into the newly expanded Lee Lue article, per Nposs, then I will concede to the withdrawal this nom.--William Thweatt Talk | Contribs 04:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
    • That is completely unnecessary and moreover this is an inappropriate venue to discuss merge options. This is articles for deletion, not merge requests. Burntsauce 21:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I agree with the above. There is very little, in books and other sources, beyond the fact that Vang Sue was Lee Lue's wingman and was honored alongside him.--Sethacus 15:42, 3 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.