Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harvey Jackson

Harvey Jackson

I speedied this article twice, but it was restored twice (once by me). Still, Wikipedia is not a memorial. While I offer my condolences to Mr. Jackson, he needs to be more notable for stuff other than losing his wife in the recent hurricane and going on TV about it. Due to the heavy loses in the hurricane, there will be others going on TV to express their sadness. Delete, but a gentle one. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let's keep for the moment. It could turn out his story is fake or his wife was actually a space alien or he runs for Congress or something in the near future. Weak keep. Stlemur 04:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; he's become a celebrity, more or less. --Merovingian (t) (c) 04:20, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
Keep for the moment at least Nick Catalano (Talk) 04:27, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete or transwiki. Wrong project. There's nothing wrong with the content except that it's not encyclopedic, because nobody is going to remember Mr. Jackson in a year or two. The fact that people are voting "keep for the moment" is a perfect indication that this is transitory content: interesting now, but not for long. That makes it news, so it belongs on Wikinews. Isomorphic 04:31, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Perhaps when the Harvey Jackson Trust opens, but at the moment he's no more notable than any other named or photographed interviewee in a disaster report, i.e. he isn't notable. Besides, how do we know he isn't lying? -Ashley Pomeroy 04:57, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Maybe add later if still noteworthy. Jehochman 05:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep However macabre it might be he has been referenced on TV and has been reported by the BBC that alone makes him nontrivial--Machtzu 05:24, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Millions of people loose loved ones in tragic circumstances every day. The fact that a TV crew happen to stumble upon Mr. Jackson does not make him notable. Similarly, every day the news media reports on non-notable people whose lives are momentarily thrust into the spotlight. If Jackson gains notability, then we can add an article. Cnwb 06:03, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Wikipedia is not a memorial. Harvey Jackson is not notable. — JIP | Talk 06:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People die all the time. Coffee 07:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the nominator Pilatus 07:48, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Effect of Hurricane Katrina on Mississippi or Effect of Hurricane Katrina on Biloxi, after Effect of Hurricane Katrina on New Orleans. Samaritan 08:00, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge I second Samaritan's merge idea. --Ferretsage 09:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Wikipedia is not a memorial. It wasn't even him who died, and his wife wouldn't warrant an article, either. Proto t c 09:18, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I have added an article on historian and professor Harvey Jackson III. If the concensus is to delete this article, I would suggest moving the article on Harvey Jackson III to this namespace. Capitalistroadster 09:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or transwiki to Wikinews if possible. Being the subject of a 2-minute interview on the news, doesn't make you encyclopedia worthy. Besides, the article tells nothing about him, apart from the fact he's got two children. It's totally mistitled. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:00, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
Delete (nothing to add to the above) Kiss L 10:11, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
keep, pending a merge delete in a week if no suitable article to merge it with is written by then. Thryduulf 10:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, but reevaluate two weeks from now. I'd rather defer a VfD until a time when we can have perspective, rather than a cycle of add/delete/add/delete while the news is big. --Bletch 10:54, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator DV8 2XL 11:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; this can always be rewritten later if he becomes more notable. Nandesuka 11:42, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per Samaritan. ~~ N (t/c) 12:51, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
keep He became a symbol of the emotional response for Katrina and does extremely well on the Google Test. Notable. ---FoodMarket ^talk! 12:53, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I think most of these aren't this Harvey Jackson.
  - Agreed. Harvey Jackson isn't a particularly unusual name. ral315 13:28, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Delete, if the person is notable later, the article can be recreated. -- Kjkolb 13:34, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
- If this person is non-notable later, this article can be deleted then. 64.59.209.89 14:16, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh.. Delete.--Encephalon | ^ζ 14:01:04, 2005-08-31 (UTC)
Delete. WP:ISNOT a memorial. -Splash 14:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep, pending a Merge. I say merge it with the main article under effects in Biloxi Mississippi for now. It's really WAY too early to tell what his place is. He may go vastly unremembered in the long run, or he may become the symbol human element of the entire event, like Tank Man with Tiananmen Square or Baby 81 with the Indian Ocean Tsunami disaster. jcomp489
Delete. GhePeU 14:50, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Nandesuka. Getting your 15 minutes of fame does not make for encyclopedic notability. Fernando Rizo T/C 16:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep with no prejudice to a later nomination or (better) a later merger when all this material is more settled. Christopher Parham (talk) 17:20, 2005 August 31 (UTC)
'keep please why should this ever be erased Yuckfoo 17:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Temp keep as per jcomp. This guy could be the one everyone remembers. I know I've had him EXPLICITLY cited to me at least twice now... -HX 17:44, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge per jcomp, since this interview is like the photo of the fireman carrying the baby after the Murrah bombing...it's a symbol of the event, and is getting a lot of play in the media. People may remember him or his story and search for it, so it should be somewhere - best in the Biloxi article.
Delete. WP is not a memorial. Quale 18:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP. Harvey's story caps the plight of those drastically affected by the natural catastrophe. His tormented face, and the interviewing reporter's vain efforts to contain her emotional response are seared in the memories of those who have seen the clip on T.V.
Delete. Short-term interest (although tragic) Dananderson 19:08, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep now, Merge later let's see if his story becomes iconic enough to warrant an indvidual page. Glowimperial 19:37, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; Everyone who's on tv gets a Wiki entry now? --Barryap 20:16, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; I agree with people who said wikipedia is not a memorial 210.54.8.253 20:38, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and delete. I agree with Samaritan on this one. Also, I hate to be a cynic, but don't believe he should have his own article unless it can be proven that his story is actually true. If anything, he might only be notable for pulling off a terrible hoax during a time of tragedy. Beginning 21:14, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
Delete per Zscout370, Proto and Nandesuka. WP is not a memorial. --Blackcap | talk 21:33, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
Merge to Hurricane Katrina for a brief reference; redirect to Harvey Jackson III, the notable historian. Neutrality^talk 22:01, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
Wait at least three weeks before processing a VfD, or Merge with one of the Katrina articles. -- Seth Ilys 22:39, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you mean that my nomination should have waited or should the closing take place three weeks later than usual? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 22:46, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a memorial. --Carnildo 23:04, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Dottore So
Delete - He is just one of the many devastated. Just because you are caught on camera, doesn't make you any more noteworthy than the rest. - Hahnchen 23:22, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Not notable enough for a seperate article. siafu 00:00, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wikinews or Delete in 3 weeks if nothing else concerning him happens. If something notable happens with him later, the article can just be rewritten. --Miroku Sanna 00:04, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Yes, I am sympathetic, no, I do not think man's story is worth a wikipedia article. User:tstockma
Delete. WP is not a memorial. Tonywalton | Talk 00:28, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
For all you people saying WP is not a memorial -- Harvey isn't dead. The "memorial" would be for his wife. this article is about Harvey as a symbol of the human suffering of Katrina 69.142.21.24 03:16, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The article was only started because Mr. Jackson lost his wife in the Hurricane and got facetime due to it. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:25, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Zscout, couldnt you make a similar argument for Scott Peterson? Or are all murder trials notable? There are dozens of murder trials each week not given articles in WP 69.142.21.24
    - Scott's murder caused debates about how fetuses are treated as criminal victims and caused for the passage of state and federal laws. Due to that, Scott Petterson has a lasting effect on victim's rights and criminal procedures (and perhaps American attitudes on the dealth penalty). Zscout370 (Sound Off) 04:34, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Thousands died. Sadly, Harvey's story is not unique. If an article is added on the Media Coverage of Hurricane Katrina or Media Coverage of Natural Disasters, this would fit there. Harvey as an individual does not warrant an article. 141.154.244.208 03:29, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for now. Revisit in a few weeks. People may be interested enough in this person to turn to Wikipedia for information about him, at least for a little while. -- BDAbramson ^talk 04:30, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Merge for now, consider separate article in a month or two --Sophitus 05:54, September 1, 2005 (UTC)
Merge A two-minute interview, when he's one of potentially thousands of comparable stories. Unless he becomes a spokesman for survivors or something, he's not individually notable -- even for this. --Dhartung | Talk 06:52, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. While Wikipedia is not a memorial, per se, mention of Jackson may be appropriate in a Media Coverage or Effects article. Deadsalmon 07:28, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Move/rename for now. As it stands, this is an article about a media event or a media phenomenon, not an article about a human being. --arkuat (talk) 07:50, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into effects/media coverage. I've seen the clip featuring Jackson on CNN, Vesti, and ZDF, so it seems to have been one most widespread clips of early coverage, and is therefore noteworthy, but probably not noteworthy enough to deserve its own article. 66.177.132.73 08:57, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above. The interview's been shown on all the main news channels here in Britain, and is likely to be something people remember from the coverage, but an article to himself is overdoing it a little since he's not (at the moment, anyway) notable in any way that can be separated from Katrina. Loganberry (Talk) 11:58, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge--Ted-m 13:09, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not an obituary column. ral315 13:28, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

Dude's not dead. jcomp489

Wife is.—Encephalon | ^ζ 13:42:11, 2005-09-01 (UTC)

Delete. Would Wikipedia keep an article about a Bangladeshi Harvey Jackson? We need to, constantly, be aware of the problems with Ethnocentrism and Systemic bias. --Tsaddik Dervish 13:40, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, we would. See Baby 81 64.59.209.89 14:36, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
delete Googling ("Harvey Jackson" Katrina -wikipedia) only gets 35 hits, all on the first page false positives. Rich Farmbrough 13:55, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- try doing that same search on news.google.com -- dozens of results, all relevant. 64.59.209.89 14:35, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If being on TV is all it takes, I am several times more notable than Mr. Jackson. But I am not notable, and neither is he. Cmadler 14:04, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- are you a symbol of a national tragedy discussed offices, schools, and homes world-wide? And were your appearances aired and re-aired countless times by EVERY MAJOR NEWS STATION IN THE WORLD? If so, maybe you too should have a Wikipedia article 64.59.209.89 14:35, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - I agree. Jackson is a borderline case (I'm not voting for that reason), but if Cmadler is several times more notable than him, I think he not only needs an article, but that it should be our next collaboration of the week. Everyking 14:42, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or transwiki This is the wrong place. CJewell (talk) 16:36, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a hoax. Harvey Jackson is a artist from Gillette, Wyoming. 212.101.64.4 16:45, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]