Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clarence Elkins

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. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 01:18, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarence Elkins[edit]

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

This article meets notability guidelines and I believe other wikipedia guidelines, however, the subject of the article has asked for the article to be deleted. The person who asked for the article to be deleted was the one who submitted the photo, so I believe it to be a legitimate request. On the talk page he posted:

"My name is Clarence Elkins Sr. I created this page and felt safe putting my information on the web. Since I created the page I have felt much stress & threatened from people trying to get in touch for all the wrong reasons due to my Wikipedia page. I've had enough stress in my life and I am asking you to please remove this page ASAP"

I'm not sure how these issues are typically handled, so I felt a discussion here would be the best solution. I am a major editor for the article and I feel it's an important topic and would wholeheartedly support keeping the article if it was at AFD, however, I also don't want the page to cause anyone any trouble. So, this is the issue at hand. Bali88 (talk) 21:15, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:01, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Elkins is notable and chose to remain a public figure after his release from prison. Commendably, he lobbied hard for changes to Ohio criminal law, spoke publicly about his ordeal, and donated funds for a college scholarship named after him. He is the subject of a documentary film and there are many articles about him readily available online. I see no good argument for deleting our article about him. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:46, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Comemitmier (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 17:06, 26 Octoberr 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:23, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:24, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The large majority of this content appears to focus on the event, rather than the subject's efforts in the reform of criminal law. Would this not warrant a reworking of the article as Murder of Judy Johnson as is typically done with such articles? -Location (talk) 20:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reply That is a possible approach, but the only thing that makes that murder notable is the false conviction and imprisonment of Clarence Elkins. I believe that he is the primary topic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:19, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. The murder itself is not notable. Also, if he's being contacted because of the article, that won't help things. That's the main issue: whether we should delete the article because the subject requests it. I feel for the guy. I really do. He's been to hell and back and I hate to think he's being harassed because of this. I brought the article up to Wikipedia standards to help make sure his story got the proper recognition, If the article is having a detrimental effect on the subject, we should consider whether the article is that important. Bali88 (talk) 05:06, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that Elkins needs to verify his identity through WP:OTRS and give us a much clearer and more detailed explanation of why this Wikipedia article in particular is causing him problems. Anyone hostile Googling him will find an abundance of other information even if we delete our article. What, precisely, is the problem here, Bali88? I consider the request to delete implausible at this time. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:17, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wish I knew. I am not in contact with Elkins and do not know him personally. Personally, I think it's a legitimate request from him directly based on the fact that the same account that posted the photo (which was named something along the lines of "mom and Clarence") was the one that posted the request. I invited that poster to comment here at AFD, but I have no idea how often they check back or how familiar they are with wikipedia. In normal circumstances, I'd attempt to reach out elsewhere (facebook group, charitable foundation) but because he is specifically complaining about being contacted, I'll abstain. Personally, I feel like all of this information was found in news reports, not through original research, background check, etc, so whoever wants to get information about him can do the same. But I do feel bad for the guy. Bali88 (talk) 17:29, 31 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - if we star to delete articles per request we will soon see big stars contacting Wikipedia to remove them. Like lets say Tom Hanks or whoever. No Wikipedia should not censor notable articles, like this one.--BabbaQ (talk) 00:35, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm a bit baffled by the request. The story is all over the Internet and the article appears to be written neutrally. It's important and notable, so there is no policy basis for deleting it.I am One of Many (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2014 (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.