Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billie Flynn

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 delete. One argument for notability was based on his relationship to Julie Payette which would have made him viceregal consort, but that's out because they're divorced (even assuming it was enough to begin with). The other is his status as a test pilot, but that failed to convince the other participants in the AfD. -- RoySmith (talk) 18:09, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Billie Flynn[edit]

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

WP:BLP of a person which was created in error. With the announcement yesterday that Julie Payette will be the next Governor General of Canada, this was created on the good faith basis that Flynn would accordingly become the viceregal consort — but what the creator missed is that Flynn and Payette are divorced, so Flynn will have no special dignitary status at all. But unfortunately, that was its only genuinely strong notability claim: nothing left here passes any subject-specific notability criteria at all, and the sourcing is too strongly dependent on primary sources to hand him a WP:GNG pass in lieu. Of the few genuinely reliable sources here, even one of them is covering him more for being married to Payette at the time than for anything that would have gotten him into an encyclopedia otherwise — leaving just two pieces of media coverage about him qua him, which is not enough to hand "notable per GNG just because media coverage exists" to a person who doesn't meet any SNG. (I've been the subject of two pieces of media coverage in my lifetime, so if that were all it took I'd be notable too. But I'm not, because the context of what journalists wrote about me for isn't something that would merit permanent consecration into an international encyclopedia.) Brownie points to the creator for good faith, but there's just not grounds for an article here anymore. Bearcat (talk) 05:09, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 05:14, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. 142.160.131.202 (talk) 18:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. 142.160.131.202 (talk) 18:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 142.160.131.202 (talk) 18:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

- Consecrate? Wikipedia isn't a holy text!. Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 23:46, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really think taking issue with a bit of sarcastic wordplay about myself has anything to do with the substance of the discussion at hand? Bearcat (talk) 21:43, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable; concur with the assessment above. Geoff NoNick (talk) 10:43, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Meh - in my defence as the article's creator, even Macleans magazine put up a profile of him on the belief they were still married and he'd be consort and the possible implications since he works for a company pitching military planes to the government - an which they've since removed when they learned they're divorced. Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 11:35, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline Keep- Flynn has received coverage independently due to his role as a test pilot - see this CBC article "F-35 test pilot wants kids to share his love of flying: Veteran of RCAF visiting Abbotsford International Airshow to show off plane's tech, talk to kids". His relation to Payette wasn't even mentioned in passing. And also this Toronto Star article which again makes no mention of Payette: "F-35 test pilot gives his travel tips: Retired Canadian forces jet pilot Billie Flynn has been a Lockheed Martin test pilot since 2003. We get him to talk about what he does on vacation" Hungarian Phrasebook (talk) 13:04, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ - Haven't seen a citation for an official divorce. Possible that they're separated and might get back together and then he'll be a viceregal consort. sikander (talk) 12:36, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that the article should be kept because the subject could theoretically become notable in the future were he to get back together with his ex? 142.160.131.202 (talk) 18:31, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:CRYSTAL, we do not keep articles just because the subject might attain a stronger notability claim in the future than they have today. Sure, he might get back together with Julie Payette — but he also might not. So we keep or delete articles based on what's already true today, and then permit future recreation if the circumstances change. Bearcat (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Changing to delete now that it's confirmed they are divorced: http://ipolitics.ca/2017/07/18/pmo-has-no-comment-on-julie-payettes-expunged-2011-assault-charge/ sikander (talk) 20:33, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not seeing notability; a pilot doing his job, along with some PR work. Kierzek (talk) 18:55, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm going out on a limb here, but I think he passes WP:GNG as a test pilot. He was president of the Society of Experimental Test Pilots, has played a prominent part in the F-35 project. He has been involved in the F-35 controversy in Canada. And there is no shortage of biographical material on him to improve the article with eg [1][2] which don't even mention his ex-astronaut ex. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:18, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete too closely tied to Payette to stand on its own. EncyclopediaUpdaticus (talk) 04:28, 16 July 2017 (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.