Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mourad Topalian

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. — Aitias // discussion 00:24, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mourad Topalian[edit]

Mourad Topalian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

WP:BLP1E - entire article is about criminal charges related to a weapons case. Should be deleted and restarted fresh on the case, if it's a notable case at all. Hipocrite (talk) 12:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Are there no suitable merge targets? Rd232 talk 13:02, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The merge target would surely be an article about the bombings, which doesn't exist. Apparently, the bombings are not notable enough for an article, but this person is notable because he admitted (20 years later) to storing the explosives used. That's WikiLogic for you. Physchim62 (talk) 14:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I think the article about Topalian should be kept, as he was a chairman of Armenian National Committee of America. We have articles about other chairmen of this organization, like Ken Hachikian. The info about Topalian's criminal case could be split to a separate article. Grandmaster 13:09, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A search by Google shows that Hachikian is much more notable for different issues (including as a current chair of ANCA) while Topalian is mostly notable for the weapon's case. I can't find any other facts from Topalian's biography or any notable activities within ANCA. Gazifikator (talk) 13:36, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Google search gives 1,120 hits. [1] Google books search: [2] - 31 hits. I think this shows notability. Grandmaster 14:17, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As you can see, the great majority of sources is dedicated to the case and his possible (unproved) participation [3] not to his person or something notable out of this case. Gazifikator (talk) 15:27, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion in UNO also demonstrates notability. Grandmaster 16:06, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Source? Rd232 talk 11:30, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Index to Proceedings of the General Assembly 2000-2001. Turkish delegation mentioned Toplian's case in its memos, circulated at the General Assembly. Delegation of Armenia responded. Grandmaster 12:09, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, checking the links to the article, Topalian is mentioned in the article about Carmine Agnello. I think this could be another argument for the need of an article about Topalian. Grandmaster 07:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. contains unproved allegations against a living person and some misinterpreted sources. Also no other notable facts for this person except of this "case". Gazifikator (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. subject is only notable for ONEEVENT, and thus the article will be a permanent magnet for BLP violations. Physchim62 (talk) 14:05, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The person is notable, otherwise NBC wouldn't produce a program about him [4]. In addition, he was a leading figure in the Armenian National Committee of America and made immense contribution to the growth of Armenian American political advocacy. Chippolona (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Or we can rename the article to United States v. Mourad Topalian. Basically, the current article is all about this case. Chippolona (talk) 14:49, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be reluctant to accept that because (a) it requires the case to be notable enough for its own article, which I think is doubtful. (b) it will still effectively be about a single individual, so risks seeming an end-run around WP:BLP1E; (c) if it only reported what was actually demonstrated in court, it would be rather short. Rd232 talk 16:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP General Notability Guidelines say: If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. No doubt, the topic satisfies the criteria. Chippolona (talk) 07:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. He may be notable for something more than ANCA and criminal charges. If so, then keep. brandспойт 16:31, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Maybe not very impresive biography, but it doesn't mean that this person is not enough notable. Rsolero (talk) 21:20, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's neither an argument nor an opinion. Do you think he's notable enough or not, and why? Rd232 talk 21:44, 27 May 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Mourad_Topalian&oldid=1069480436"