Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Wayne Hull

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 keep. Sources have shown the person is notable. (Non-admin closure) Intelligentsium 22:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Wayne Hull[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Although this KKK leader and convicted criminal has several media references, etc., this seems like a WP:BLP1E of a person who is not, in the end, encyclopedically notable. Glenfarclas (talk) 20:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article is a cut and paste from its source. Bonewah (talk) 20:13, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Multi-agency Joint Terrorism Task Force is focusing on domestic terrorists and Hull is one among the examples. This article was created less than an hour ago and the editors who want to delete it have not allowed time to flesh it out. For the record, it now has three sources; Glenfarclas does not know the history and is guessing without factual knowledge whether this person is worthy of encylopedic reference. Hull was preparing to blow up a clinic. Skywriter (talk) 20:35, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably, fleshing out the article will not make this man more notable, sorry. I looked for sources, but they are either primary documents (like the very short mention in the FBI publication you provided), non-reliable sources like the ADL, or routine news coverage as would be expected in a BLP1E situation. It's not like I didn't give this deletion nomination a modicum of thought, and you'll notice I sent it straight to AfD rather than tagging him for speedy deletion. Glenfarclas (talk) 20:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The three sources only confirm that this is a clear BLP1E situation. Furthermore, it still contains large sections that were clipped from the FBI report. If you fix it I will be happy to change my mind. Bonewah (talk) 21:01, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are more than 8500 links to this individual even assuming some of them refer to others with same name. "Large sections from the FBI report" is one paragraph, which I will rewrite. There's discussion at the Ku Klux Klan article whether contemporary Klansmen are terrorists and whether law enforcement goes after them. The Hull article et al. is evidence of answers to both questions. By Glenfaclas logic, only when terrorist successfully kills someone are they noteworthy. I give law enforcement some credit for averting tragedy.Skywriter (talk) 21:09, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep major figure of historic importance, as shown by the references available. I do not see what is wrong with using language from the FRBI report--its US-PD. DGG ( talk ) 04:54, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Timotheus Canens (talk) 19:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:40, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notable, and not a BLP-1E situation. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:15, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What would you say are his other claims to fame? Bonewah (talk) 18:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Notable. Added another Pittsburgh Post-Gazette ref to the article. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:12, 25 January 2010 (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.