joshua.zelinsky@yale.edu wrote:
Quoting RLS evendell@gmail.com:
It's not a matter of "acceptance." See [[WP:BLP1E]]. If someone is only notable because of one event, then there should be an article about the event but not a biography that we can't source.
If they're notable for, say, significant contributions to one subject area, that's different; but there should already be material we could source from to create a BLP-compliant biography article, and it wouldn't have been deleted in the first place.
--Darkwind
Up to a point. If someone almost but not quite met notability for one thing and then made a lot of noise about the matter and so got notability for the noisemaking, as an editorial decision it would make more sense to simply make an article under the person's title. Furthermore, in certain cases, a person is notable for a single event, but the notability is so high that we keep them anyways. To use an extreme example, we have an article on [[John Wilkes Booth]] and a separate article on [[Abraham Lincoln assassination]]. Even if Booth were alive today we wouldn't merge his article with the main assassination article.
No, we probably wouldn't merge Booth's article with the assassination article, in the same way we haven't merged [[Mehmet Ali Ağca]], who is a living person, with [[1981 Pope John Paul II assassination attempt]]. However, I also don't really think an assassination attempt on a world leader to be the type of event BLP1E addresses. In my opinion, I take BLP1E to refer more to the type of fame generated by Internet drama, YouTube popularity, possibly 15 minutes of Reality TV fame, etc.
The fact that someone is only truly notable because of press drama regarding their article being deleted still falls under BLP1E if they don't meet any other criteria for notability.
--Darkwind