Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Owen Honors
nominator continues to talk about news coverage...then says article does not meet notability guidelines.Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide is an essay, "This advice is not a formal Wikipedia policy or guideline, though it may be consulted for assistance during an AfD discussion or when considering creating a standalone article." even then this essay states: "In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources."  no one here argues that  this owens has not been in "multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources." is probably one of the most abused AFD argument and misunderstood guideline. "Another issue arises when an individual plays a major role in a minor event. In this case, it is not generally appropriate to have an article on both the person and the event. Generally in this case, the name of the person should redirect to the article on the incident, especially if the individual is only notable for that incident and is all that that person is associated with in source coverage." In this case, the minor event and the person are the same. Based on  guidelines, would the nominator agree to close this AFD and redirect this article to the Owen Honors incident?The example in the guideline itself states "For example, Steve Bartman redirects to Steve Bartman incident". This is NOT a "Wikipedia:Other stuff exists" essay argument, as this is the EXAMPLE used in the notability guideline.  Surely this case is more important than the Steve Bartman incident (a baseball scandal), because this incident, on the advent of gays being allowed to openly serve, shows the bias of some of those highest in the military and the issues the bias they still have to overcome
— User:Adamtheclown, 16:56, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:ONEVENT||WP:ONEVENT (Wikipedia:Notability)