Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Lewis (arson victim)

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 redirect.--Kubigula (talk) 04:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Lewis (arson victim)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:ONEEVENT. He's notable for a single thing in which he played no major part, and nothing else. I would also caution the article creator to be careful about the language he uses in the future; "murder"? really? Ironholds (talk) 17:08, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A tragic death, for certain. But the nominator is correct. Warrah (talk) 17:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel fire, as that contains everything that is of encyclopedic note - ie a list of the victims. (The victims were all redlinked, other than the one we're discussing here and one other that was just redirected back to the same article - I have removed all the redlinks and the circular one) -- Boing! said Zebedee 18:20, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS: The perpetrator was actually convicted of murder. -- Boing! said Zebedee 18:21, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect or Delete, whichever is more appropriate. Simon-in-sagamihara (talk) 22:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect fails WP:1EVENT. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 23:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel fire as per Boing! said Zebedee Codf1977 (talk) 16:04, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination Nick-D (talk) 05:39, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel fire, non-notable individual. See also Michael Ernest Lewis. WWGB (talk) 01:14, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The author of the article has added comments at Talk:Michael Lewis (arson victim), which should be considered when closing. -- Boing! said Zebedee 08:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the Childers Palace Backpackers Hostel fire. The individual's article is merely information about the fire (adequately covered in the main article) and mundane biographical information (which is non-notable). --JamesAM (talk) 04:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I respect all your comments, but... Wikipedia notoriety is almost entirely based on the extent of media coverage: Michael Lewis was included in nearly every UK national and many local newspaper articles and in nearly every TV channel news broadcast. His life may not have been sensational before his death but his death was notorious (the Wikipedia requirement).Duncanogi (talk) 07:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. WP:ONEEVENT; "When an individual is significant for their role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both. In considering whether or not to create separate articles, the degree of significance of the event itself and the degree of significance of the individual's role within it should be considered. The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person. However, as both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles become justified." - the individual's role in this was minor; he died, that's it. That's far below the level of significance required for his article. Notoriety in death is not the Wikipedia article, particularly since we have policies like WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:ONEEVENT (and the fact that "notoriety" is not the same thing as notability. Ironholds (talk) 07:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.