joshua.zelinsky(a)yale.edu wrote:
Quoting RLS <evendell(a)gmail.com>om>:
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