Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gustus Bozarth

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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:28, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gustus Bozarth[edit]

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

Man picks up flag after storm. The USA is probably the only country where such a thing would receive media attention. But is it notable? — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 01:45, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure: I am not article's creator but have contributed significantly to it. RHaworth brings up an interesting point; something can be newsworthy and not necessarily be notable. The article lists, I believe, 5 sources, which i believe would satisfy notability guidelines. Whether or not it is notable to a particular individual is a matter of preference. Tennis is very notable overall, while of little note to me. I believe the story made news because the man in question is homeless and he put himself out in order to go get the flag, fold it, and get it out of the rain. Anyway, the story was notable enough to be covered nationally. Whether or not it is notable enough for a encyclopedia will be, I suppose, settled here. Just thought I'd respectfully add my .02 :) Thanks. Whatever the administrators decide to do will be done, I'm sure, in good faith and with the best interests of Wikipedia at heart. All the best, Pianotech (talk) 03:42, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This person is only known for a single event and the event itself doesn't warrant an article. ElKevbo (talk) 14:54, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

reply Notwithstanding this article, I respectfully submit that the "only known for a single event" philosophy is flawed. What do Lee Harvey Oswald, Charles Lindbergh, The Wright Brothers, Neil Armstrong, Charles Manson, John Wilkes Booth, Amelia Aerhart, and Alexander Graham Bell all have in common? They are notable for one event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pianotech (talk • contribs) 12:53, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree and you're either misunderstanding or misstating the philosophy. But this isn't the place for this discussion. ElKevbo (talk) 17:00, 11 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable, not a significant event. Plenty of things get covered nationally yet are not encyclopedic subjects. "Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information." WP:BLP1E WP:NOTNEWS. Шизомби (Sz) (talk) 15:25, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:03, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have to say, this is actually funny now, because in reading your responses, you guys have convinced me to change my mind. RHaworth's opening statement made me think about notability vs. newsworthiness. Until that point I hadn't really considered the difference, but in reading the replies it's now clear that something can be newsworthy and not be notable (and vice-versa). Something can receive widespread media attention and not be encyclopedic. A definite learning experience thanks to this discussion. Thanks for the consideration. :) Pianotech (talk) 20:24, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: not notable at all. Dewritech (talk) 21:09, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as article fails WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ONEEVENT. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 21:43, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I quote from above "Not notable, not a significant event. Plenty of things get covered nationally yet are not encyclopedic subjects. 'Wikipedia is not news, or an indiscriminate collection of information.'" Then how can there be an article about someone like Sara Carbonero? Notable? I don't think so! She's a spanish news person. A very beautiful one granted but definetly not encyclepedic. I make this comparison because Gustus Bozarth has touched millions of people in a way that very very few have or ever will. This is NOTABLE and encyclopedic unlike countless other artcles on wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markm913 (talk • contribs) 17:27, 12 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:OTHERSTUFF and you might avoid the hyperbole as well. Carbonero's article probably should be prodded or sent to AfD. Шизомби (Sz) (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2010 (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.