Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Furkan Doğan: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Furkan Doğan: Reply to Chesdovi
Line 37: Line 37:
::: Chesdovi said it well: "Dogen is not notable in himself. His killing is." And the killing is part of [[Gaza flotilla raid]]. He wasn't killed on "personal basis". --[[User:Kslotte|Kslotte]] ([[User talk:Kslotte|talk]]) 12:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::: Chesdovi said it well: "Dogen is not notable in himself. His killing is." And the killing is part of [[Gaza flotilla raid]]. He wasn't killed on "personal basis". --[[User:Kslotte|Kslotte]] ([[User talk:Kslotte|talk]]) 12:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::::Vote '''Merge'' then. No need for separate article. [[User:Chesdovi|Chesdovi]] ([[User talk:Chesdovi|talk]])
::::Vote '''Merge'' then. No need for separate article. [[User:Chesdovi|Chesdovi]] ([[User talk:Chesdovi|talk]])
:: The question isn't whose death "counts" but who meets the Wikipedia notability guidelines. They all have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. [[User:Sanguinalis|Sanguinalis]] ([[User talk:Sanguinalis|talk]]) 02:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' US media discovered execution video; [Dave Lindorff's article http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/95], Even this long discussion proves that is NOTABLE. --[[User:Sezerpal|Sezerpal]] ([[User talk:Sezerpal|talk]]) 21:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' US media discovered execution video; [Dave Lindorff's article http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/node/95], Even this long discussion proves that is NOTABLE. --[[User:Sezerpal|Sezerpal]] ([[User talk:Sezerpal|talk]]) 21:25, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
** And how reliable is that source? And the victum can't be identified in that video. --[[User:Kslotte|Kslotte]] ([[User talk:Kslotte|talk]]) 22:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
** And how reliable is that source? And the victum can't be identified in that video. --[[User:Kslotte|Kslotte]] ([[User talk:Kslotte|talk]]) 22:10, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Revision as of 02:46, 18 June 2010

Furkan Doğan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is not a notable topic per WP:ONEEVENT and WP:MEMORIAL. Marokwitz (talk) 14:42, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • His role was getting killed, a sad as that is. He was not a major player in the events. By your rationale, every person that died in the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks should have thier own page because it significantly changed relations between the United States and numerous other nations. Movementarian (Talk) 14:00, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The "Significant international media coverage" is about the whole flotila incident, not Dogan in particular. Chesdovi (talk) 10:30, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Several of the editors who are proposing deletion seem to have overlooked the main point in favor of Doğan's notability, that he was the only American citizen killed in the raid. The geopolitical significance of Doğan's death has been noted by several reliable sources. For example, the Christian Science Monitor:
Though Dogan’s ongoing American ties appear to be limited, the death of a US citizen will make it harder for the Obama administration to side-step a diplomatic confrontation with Israel.[1]
The Dallas Morning News;
The diplomatic drama over Israel's assault widened when one of the dead was identified as 19-year-old Furkan Dogan, who had dual U.S.-Turkish citizenship.[2]
The New York Daily News::
The death of an American citizen in the botched Israeli commando raid put pressure on the Jewish state Thursday to ease its Gaza naval blockade. [3]
This is not a case of WP:MEMORIAL. I don't know Doğan or anyone in his family, and there is no indication that any involved editor here does. As for WP:ONEEVENT, that policy applies to people who play minor roles in significant events. Doğan's role was anything but minor. Kslotte has said that some of the information about Doğan should be in Gaza flotilla raid, and some in Israel – United States relations. This is telling: the fact that Doğan is pertinant to two different Wikipedia articles underlies his significance. Not just the circumstances of his death, but the actions which led to it, his background, and his motivation are all notable and worthy subject matter for an article. Sanguinalis (talk) 10:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Do only America's dead count? The relations between Israel and each county whose citizens died will naturally be affected. Both USA and Turkey are allies of Israel. This page should be merged. Dogen is not notable in himself. His killing is. Chesdovi (talk) 10:45, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Chesdovi said it well: "Dogen is not notable in himself. His killing is." And the killing is part of Gaza flotilla raid. He wasn't killed on "personal basis". --Kslotte (talk) 12:44, 16 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Vote 'Merge then. No need for separate article. Chesdovi (talk)
The question isn't whose death "counts" but who meets the Wikipedia notability guidelines. They all have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Sanguinalis (talk) 02:46, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Significant international media coverage about this shooting incident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.95.176.104 (talk) 01:51, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Significant". I don't think so. This item of news filled the usual space such a thing would do in the press. I am sure the ratio of this item to that of the rest of the news in the papers is not that significant at all. Wiki is not a newspaper, that belongs over at wikinews. Should we have a page about Conservative plans to introduce a one pint drink/drive limit as it made the front page headlines and will be in the news for a short while? Chesdovi (talk) 10:31, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge As the one who contested an earlier PROD to give the article and news sources time to settle, I can't say the article is currently in a state worth remaining separate. Its information should be rolled into the articles mentioned above. If Dogan becomes a propaganda figure like Corrie sometime in the future, then he may warrant his own article. But not until in-depth discussions of his background and life appear in reliable sources. Dragoneer (talk) 02:35, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The shooting video makes him as important as Rachel Corrie. (though it is still not clear it is him who was shot there in the video Kavas (talk) 22:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
R Corrie is not important. Neither was her death. It was the cult that arose in the months and years after her death. It is not for nothing that M al-Durah page was renamed to Muhammad al-Durrah incident. Many young boys have unfortunatly been killed. It was the footage of this and the subsequent controversy that made it a unique "incident". al-Durrah's shooting without the video is not notable. Even if footage exists of events on the flotilla, it is the whole episode which carries notability, not the shooting of one participant. Chesdovi (talk) 23:11, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]