Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rex Tomb

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. All of the "don't delete" arguments are from the same editor. --Core desat 01:57, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rex Tomb[edit]

Rex Tomb is an FBI official who has been cited in a few news articles about Osama bin Laden, but otherwise is not notable enough for a Wikipedia article and does not meet WP:BIO. There are very insufficient reliable sources to create a biographical article about him. --Aude (talk) 16:00, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As per nom. 604,000 google hits.--Edtropolis 16:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I get 805,000 Google hits without quotation marks, but most are irrelevant. Only 875 hits on "Rex Tomb".[1] PrimeHunter 02:17, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delelte, per nom. Just a press release does not make him notable, nor does working for FBI. --soum ^talk 16:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Also, Tomb sounds like an FBI spin doctor, and the article is more about the FBI's Most-Wanted list not connecting bin Laden to the Sept. 11, 2001 attack than it is about Tomb. When he personally locates and catches bin Laden (or does some other notable act), he can be included on Wikipedia. --Evb-wiki 16:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I added the entry because he's been made infamous for his quotes that under-scored of the fact that bin Laden has had no formal charges laid against him. If you want to flesh out the article go ahead, but everyone knows who he is,so why delete the entry completly? how is he not notable if he gets 836,000 google hits? My Machinima series Fire Team Charlie is less known than Rex Tomb , but it is allowed an entry?--Bennyxbo 17:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article is a coatrack for trying to spread the word about bin Laden not being connected to 9/11. Is he the subject of reliable secondary sources where he's the subject? Also, please don't hold up WP:GHITS as the holy grail. Morgan Wick 20:24, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/partial merge The subject of the article does not seem to have notability by itself. For the article my opinion is delete per nom. For the information about Bin Laden my opinion is that it can be merged into the Bin Laden article's section about his criminal charges. There is some talk about the charges already, by whom and what for as well as Bin Laden being in the FBI's Top 22 list. The information itself is useful and would fit in there well, especially as it is sourced. Parts might go to the article about FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives as addidtional sourced information. doxTxob \ ^talk 00:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The guy's not notable and the article's just an vapid excuse for more retarded conspiracy peddling bollocks. Nick mallory 01:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Tomb is just a spokesman advancing the FBI's official position on issues. No individual notability here. We have Responsibility for the September 11, 2001 attacks for discussion of that issue. --Dhartung | Talk 01:40, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Don't Delete I started the Rex Tomb article because there is no information on wikipedia article that explains why bin Laden has not been formally charged for 9/11. This information is not present in FBI Most Wanted Terrorists or Osama bin Laden or anywhere.

Comment That was why I suggested to delete the article and to move usable, verifyable information to these articles. And you argue in this direction, too. Yes, you are right, verifyable information should not get lost, it should be in the spot where readers of Wikipedia look for it most likely. If it is verifyable information about any one from the most wanted list it should be there, if it is about Bin Laden it should be there, all well sourced, of course. As it is described in the article, he is the PR person of the FBI, some kind of spokesman. The messenger is not so important. He spoke for the FBI. And the message is the important information here. What is verifyable, and only that, should be merged into the corresponding article. Rex Tomb is in itself not notable enough to be encyclopedic. doxTxob \ ^talk 04:07, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Rex Tomb is spokesperson for the FBI's most wanted posters, The top 10 list is as old as the hills. The program was created in 1950 by J. Edgar Hoover...and it's known world-wide.I added the Wired News article in as an additional reference to add a little more credibility, however, the teamliberty.net quote is 100% in step with what Rex Tomb has been saying all along, therefore i dont feel the entire article needs to be deleted on the basis that it can't be varified.--Bennyxbo 16:09, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives is a featured list. If Tomb is known for work on that then he might be mentioned there. PrimeHunter 16:16, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete I added the Fox News .com article as another reference. He has worked on the X-Files apparently too. --Bennyxbo 15:07, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete I added the bit about the Oprah Winfrey connection, and the fact that his part of the site gets the 2-3million hits a month. Notability is there, and every bit of information has solid sources from CNN to the Washington Post.--Bennyxbo 23:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This person is not notable. Having said that, the unit he works for may be notable based on the references. So maybe an article should be created for the unit. Rex can receive a mention in the article if appropriate. Vegaswikian 23:42, 16 June 2007 (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.