Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Juan Romero (witness to RFK assassination)

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. Although there is not a clear consensus to delete in the discussion below, the importance of WP:BLP and, especially in this case, WP:BLP1E counsel strong for deletion in the absence of a consensus to keep. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Romero (witness to RFK assassination)[edit]

Declined PROD. Have sought sources, but all seem to link him simply to the events of the RFK assassination, which documents these events. Suggest deletion per WP:ONEEVENT and a lack of notability established by WP:BIO. Will be happy if non-net sources can be found, of course. Fritzpoll (talk) 19:53, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. All the relevant information in this article is already present at Robert F. Kennedy assassination. If deleted, Juan Romero (disambiguation) should be deleted also, as there will then only be a single article linked in it. JulesH (talk) 20:49, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep As the subject of an iconic photograph, he would probably be considered notable then, notable now. However, it looks as if the article's creator never completed the article. Not surprisingly, the 40th anniversary included a "whatever happened to?" story about Romero. It was linked to this page, but for whatever reason, it wasn't part of the narrative. A rather uninteresting and uninformative article about a somewhat interesting person. Mandsford (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Jules. He is not notable and only happened to be in the room. All relevant info is already covered in the article about the assassination. TJ Spyke 21:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Clearly notable in connection with JFK. Proxy User (talk) 22:37, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Notability is not inherited. Can you expand on how this individual is notable outside of their presence at RFK's assassination? Fritzpoll (talk) 08:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect clearly only notable in connection with RFK's assassination (that's why we have WP:BLP1E). Also, I tend to disbelieve our own article that says that he was 12 or 13 years old while working as a busboy - underage labor would no doubt have caused some chatter and its absence tends to indicate none such occurred - demonstrating that we have systemic problems getting the story right with these marginally notable people. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:43, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Times article says: "When Kennedy checked into the Ambassador and called for room service, Juan, then 17, cut a deal with the busboy who drew the job." In other words, he was 17, so there's no issues regarding child labor. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then why does our article say he born in 1955? Even my poor math skills is enough to know that someone born in 1955 is not 17 in 1968. So something is wrong - even after you spent some effort looking it up, you couldn't see clear to correcting a clear "error" in this BLP - demonstrating the very good reason we have BLP1E - there are insufficient sources to monitor anything in their lives but the one event. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge anything not yet there. He played a significant role in the events of that assassination, but there's not enough material to write a biography apart from that. Redirecting to the article on the assassination makes the most sense. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:37, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 10:50, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 10:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Robert F. Kennedy assassination. No independant notability, but worth a mention there. Edward321 (talk) 00:47, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Keep - Notable alone because of the sheer number of political theory researchers investigating the JFK Assassination. This article is a good repository for background material on Romero, and other more trivial information as long as we steer clear of any BLP concerns if he's still alive.Critical Chris (talk) 23:01, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
He was somewhere between 12 (if you want to believe our background material) and 17, so 40 years on, he'd be in his 50's, so our presumption unless someone comes up with evidence to the contrary is that he's alive and WP:BLP applies. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 02:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Um....Chris, Romero has nothing to do with the JFK assassination.... Fritzpoll (talk) 10:27, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Delete Juan Romero (disambiguation) as well just like User:JulesH proposes. BaldPark (talk) 00:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ONEEVENT. Not even clear it fits within the assassination article. THF (talk) 00:37, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete WP:1E, Notability is not inherited. Tavix (talk) 00:38, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Need info. Was he depicted in the movie about the assaassination? If he was a major character there, then I would say that it adds enough to his notability that even a stub would have merit. If in movie, then KEEP. If Hollywood did not find anything more significant other than the fact he lent a rosary, then the notability is probably not there. If not in movie, REDIRECT with #. MMetro (talk) 04:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:ONEEVENT. He is not notable by and interpretation of the guidelines. Even if his name has received widespread coverage, his "claim to notability" is ONLY as part of the assassanation, in which case his name should just redirect to that article. No need for a specific section in the article about him, either - just a redirect, and then people can scroll to the one or two mentions of his name. -Lilac Soul ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 06:43, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any part of this article that is of interest (such as the bit about the rosary beads) into Robert F. Kennedy assassination -- Boston (talk) 07:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The rosary beads have been in the article since before it was FA :) Fritzpoll (talk) 09:31, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Romero was a witness to the shooting and participated materially in the events thereafter. In light of conspiracy theories, the importance of the event, and its altering of history, every player, no matter how small, should have an article. Cesium_133 (talk) 10:22, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can you justify this in accordance with our policies, specifically since this would have to override WP:BLP1E. The material is covered in the assassination article (see today's FA on the main page) - why does he need an article of his own? Fritzpoll (talk) 10:25, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Policies are guidelines not set in stone. Romero is significant enough to keep and enough editors seem to think as much. If Policy is to be the only benchmark how about another Wiki policy: Wikipedia is not paper. JaneVannin (talk) 13:24, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTPAPER - "This policy is not a free pass for inclusion: articles must still abide by the appropriate content policies..." Fritzpoll (talk) 13:32, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. A couple of people have said 'He is not notable outside of the RFK assassination' and they have offered that as a reason for deletion. Could this be expanded upon? As it stands that is insufficient grounds for deletion. (Sirhan Sirhan is also "not notable outside of the RFK assassination"...!) JaneVannin (talk) 23:45, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The difference is that Sirhan Sirhan has been the principal subject of multiple independent reliable sources. Romero gets a passing mention at best, and isn't (in my analysis) notable according to WP:BIO because it's only one event that he is notable for. Whilst I agree that our guidelines on the notability of criminals ad criminal acts are not clear, I fear that this is an WP:OTHERSTRUFFEXISTS argument. Fritzpoll (talk) 12:07, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unfortunately. Due to WP:BLP1E,it cannot be a standalone article; furthermore, there is no real significance to being the last person to shake RFK's hand. The picture that has a link from the bottom of the article is much more notable than Mr. Romero (as indicated by the caption of the linked page omitting the mention of Mr. Romero's name). While a redirection is sometimes offerend as an alternative to deletion, the resulting redirect's title is not exactly "RfD friendly." B.Wind (talk) 03:11, 19 January 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.