Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jefferson DNA Data

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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 06:08, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jefferson DNA Data[edit]

Detailed description of the DNA of Thomas Jefferson and his descendents. The issues regarding his fathering children with a slave seem to pretty well-covered and, in any case, I don't see how this helps anything. Famous people's DNA is not notable; this controversy is notable, and is already well-covered elsewhere -- if more coverage were needed, there should be an article specifically about the controversy, not giving very minor details about how Jefferson DNA was recovered and what sort of DNA it was. Tuf-Kat 20:02, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The Sally Hemmings page discusses the controversy in depth. There is no need to have the DNA sequences listed in Wikipedia. --Thunk 20:53, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Or, redirect to Jefferson or Sally HemingsJporcaro 21:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do Not Delete. The actual sequences and how the haplotypes impacted the controversy are interesting to those interested in genetic genealogy. This was a prominent case and a prominent example that helped to spwan an entire industry.Sandwich Eater 21:36, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it or merge it with Hemmings. I agree with Sandwich Eater that the actual haplotypes and how the Nature article made it's case is a lot more interesting than "some scientists said X" for those interested in genetic genealogy and this issue. Brockmanah 21:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Redirect Why is everyone on the wiki so delete happy? --DragonWR12LB 21:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Thunk. -- Krash (Talk) 22:27, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as relevant. — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 23:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Most of the information would be more relevant to a genetics journal. Green Giant 23:45, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The information in the article is technical, but the topic is highly notable. BrianGCrawfordMA 00:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not encyclopedic as it is too specialist. Thatcher131 00:06, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article's not WP:PERFECT, needs improvement; that's not in question. Subject is encyclopedic and the article in no way appears to be a POV fork; it's also much more detailed than the discussion of the same topic at Sally Hemings. The historical interest of the information and its interpretation isn't in question. -ikkyu2 (talk) 00:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep or merge to Hemings article; seems harmless? Sdedeo (tips) 01:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep highly notable. JoshuaZ 03:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Move to a clearer title, such as DNA Testing of Thomas Jefferson. It should be kept, but not under the current name, since there's more than just data in the article, and the name "Jefferson" is ambiguous. -Colin Kimbrell 17:08, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as notable, verifiable article; detailed descriptions of notable topics should be encouraged, not deleted. WP has room for both breadth and depth of topics. Turnstep 14:07, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep separate from Hemings article, readers of which may be presented with a link to the DNA story or just feel content that someone else has looked at all the sequences. Carlossuarez46 02:38, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable. --S iva1979^{Talk to me} 10:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Too specialized for the Wikipedia. --CTSWyneken 22:10, 3 March 2006 (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.