Deletion of Steven Slater

Comment: When I read  this is the type of article I think about. The weight of the world of fluff journalism is against me/us, but I'm !voting my principles here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Could someone explain how Steven Slater has a non-low-profile after the media moves on?  His last few seconds of his 15 minutes of fame are nearly over. Unlike Chesley Sullenberger, he is not likely to be honored by the airline industry and his occupational groups for a lifetime of achievement in his profession.  Unlike the Balloon boy hoax there's no deeper story here about premediating a media hoax and child abuse.  Unlike the many notable performers in arts and sports cited for  above, which is not an argument to make, but an |argument to avoid, he doesn't have a record which distinquishes himself among others in his category.  If this fD passes, we will have to establish a category for persons who have saturated global media for 48 hours so that ''any person'' at some threshold of media coverage ought to have a Wikipedia article for ''any reason or no reason at all''. Slater's story is ''superficial'': he blew up in unprofessional way, deployed the evacuation chute, and was arrested.  Everything else is coverage about the coverage
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:ATA||WP:A)

Comment: He passes  and . We can always revisit the article in four to six months to see if he was just a flash in the pan. Otherwise, let it slide
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:RS)

Comment: I declined the speedy nomination, as the article did not fit the very narrow conditions of #A7.  Apart from that, I'm also in favor of a snow delete
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (WP:CSD)

Comment: per  and . Great stories and exciting gossip are welcome elsewhere, but we do not preserve someone's bad day in a pseudo encyclopedic article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: Snow Delete clearly . "Popular" does not mean "notable". —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: The level of coverage has been enough, in my view, to justify an article about this. I agree with those who say  is being misapplied in arguments to delete; what it indicates is that we should probably not have an article about the person, but about the event for which they are known
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per Favonian. Definite case of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Even if Slater falls back into obscurity, he would have something in common with John Hinckley, Jr (see ) who did not get up to very much after his assassination attempt, except going to jail. The event in this case does have significance as the first time that a flight attendant has made their own emergency exit, a hero in popular culture and the most outrageous way to quit a job. The event also highlights the rudeness of passengers these days. We can't predict where this event will end as it is still unfolding. I say let the article evolve with the incident and review later
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: As I fear that this may lead to a new trend of people doing crazy and off the wall things, just in order to get a wikipedia page about them. We really should begin to strictly enforce , or eventually it will begin to get out of hand
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: textbook 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: A classic case of BLP1E distortion.  The point of that guideline is that we should not have biographies as spinoff articles from notable events if the people in question were ancillary to the event.  But this case we have one person, one event, one article.  The topic is highly notable, being covered globally in major news media and so merits coverage in some fashion.  The name of the article and its scope is not a matter for AFD as it can be addressed by ordinary editing in accordance with our |editng policy
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Editing policy (WP:PRESERVE)

Comment: per . I agree with Robofish completely
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: based on the amount of news coverage. It is a mischaracterization of  to say this is a classic case.  Requires that he both be notable for a one time even AND that he remain a low-profile individual. He is no longer a low profile individual. He is being extensively covered by many news organizations, including http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/11/nyregion/11about.html?src=me The New York Times. Plus the story keeps growing. Witness this article published today http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/12/business/media/12adco.html?src=mv JetBlue’s Response to a Fed-Up Employee’s Exit, which queries how Jet Blue should deal with the publicity. Steven Slater is no longer a low-profile individual
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: He passes  and .  don't be so uppity and think that he's not good enough for the "wiki-world".... Lighten up and let him stay... Lighten up Francis!   —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:RS)

Comment: WP:ONEEVENT, , #NEWS, etc. And please, no more arguments about how this person's notability is certain to increase with book deals, multiple appearances on ''Oprah'', made-for-tv movies and the like. As the situation exists ''now'', this is an unsuitable topic for a Wikipedia article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENT||WP:NOT)

Comment: None of these recent keep votes speak to why ,  and  should not apply. Memo to the keep voters: ''Notable'' (in the sense of getting ''noticed'') is not sufficient.  I concede that he's gotten a lot of publicity, but in the long run, nothing of consequence has happened to anyone but Steve Slater in all of this.  It is an incident with global coverage of something ''totally inconsequential''. Already, the medias's frenzy with it is eroding and we've moving on
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:1E||WP:NOT)

Comment: prime example of . This is the kind of article that policy is written to prevent. We're not exactlyu talking about Chelsey Sullenberger here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: WP:NOTNEWS and  could have been written with this article in mind. No notability whatsoever, the guy stormed out of work and happened to end up on the "And Finally..." segments
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Most of the keep votes are of the "More things are coming" variety, which violates .  This is a clear one event situation
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)

Comment: per  and . I was tempted to close this discussion myself, but I'm short on time. If he becomes genuinely notable in the future, we can recreate or restore the article. Until then, it needs to go
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:SNOW)

Comment: Not a case of  this was a notable event in western culture.  It was a safe and sane dramatic event.  The first since 9/11 - and as such should be applauded and remembered.  This is a historical event of note by virtual of the safety within a space deemed to be the most dangerous
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: This is a textbook case of someone only known for |one event. Just because somebody had received a burst of reports for a single minor action, that doesn't mean we should write an article about them. This mania for writing about previously unknown people who are thrust into the |headlines has to stop! This isn't remotely like a proper biography, it's a wide-eyed "he said, she said" account of somebody losing their rag. (I think he's superawesometastic, for anyone about to wheel out WP:IDONTLIKEIT
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: classic case of . Quoting the policy: "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of '''a single event''', and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." If this guy become really famous down the road which I doubt, then the article can always be recreated
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: to all those WP:!vote|!voting to delete per : this event is a reasonably widely covered incident involving Jetblue Airways, meaning it is not unreasonable for it to get a brief mention in the Jetblue_Airways#Incidents_and_accidents|"Incidents" section of that article.  I agree that this individual is not notable, and that this event is not sufficently notable to warrant an article.  However, given that there is an appropriate level of coverage in the article on Jetblue Airways would it not be better to simply '''redirect''' this article to that section, thus retaining it as a plausible search term?&nbsp
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO1E)

Comment: This is definetely not a case of , apparently most of you didn't read the . The reliable sources are '''persistent'''. Right now, more people around the world know of this guy and this story then will ever know who John Hinckley is. And, according to , John Hinckley is the prototype of notability for a single event. There are more notes about this guy than about 99 percent of Wikipedia subjects. Right now, a google search for Steven Slater gives 1.4 million results. All of those results could be characterized as "Notes". If something has 1.4 million notes, then it is notable. Any other interpretation is a psychotic break from reality that, unfortunatley, has taken over the mind set of some Wikipedians. I just did a random article, from the home page of Wikipedia, and came up with "Chemlab", a band. Googling it reveals 90,000 results. How is that more notable than the millions for Steven Slater? There is no way that the notability of this story is going away. '''Keep
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Sheesh, I just knew that not only would someone write an article about this, but that the article would be listed on AfD! Does anyone else find this predictability troublesome? I believe that we need to find a better way to handle Nine Days Wonders, a phrase made famous by a publicity stunt performed by one William Kempe, whose biographical article might have vanished into the maws of fD had it not been that he worked with William Shakespeare|someone far more famous than he. Anyway, if I were pressed to opine on this matter, I'd agree to keeping the article for six months & then listing it to see if anyone remembered this notorious flight attendant: if the consensus at that time was "Who's he?" then we have a clear reason to delete the article -- or make it a redirect to Jetblue. (On the other hand, if the article is deleted now, I probably wouldn't miss it -- but I probably wouldn't miss the vast majority of the 3.3 million articles on Wikipedia. And I can't figure out why anyone would care if it was kept for a while
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Attribution (WP:A)

Comment: as soon as possible, per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: Possible compromise solution - So many people are calling for deletion per , maybe we need to follow ....... I see no event article, maybe that is a suitable compromise? Create an event article as that very much deserves an article, and would probably be better to have than an article primarily about the event than one that is lodged under someones name. Whatever happens this incident should somehow find it's way to a wiki article. Special:Contributions/24.23.198.90|24.23.198.90
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)