Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erdinç Tekir

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 but possibly merge/redirect. Continued discussion on the article's talk page will be needed to determine if and where to target a merger/redirect. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:26, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Erdinç Tekir

Erdinç Tekir (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article do not meet the general notability guideline. Kavas (talk) 16:02, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that one of Mavi Marmara passangers was a former hijacker, but that does not mean there should be an article for this man. There are only two special things in his life. Besides, he was not the leader of that hijacking event, the leader was Muhammed Emin Tokcan. In addition, there is nothing iconic about him that deserves a page, and practically you cannot write an article about a person with such little significance. Kavas (talk) 16:06, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Now we have enough information about him. Takabeg (talk) 02:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note Terrorist is a value-laden word to be avoided per WP:LABEL (.i.e. POV) (signed later on, unintended) -DePiep (talk) 17:38, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment This discussion could benefit from the help of someone able to consult Russian-language and Turkish-language newspapers for coverage of Tekir's involvement with the ferryboat hijacking, of the IHH (Turkish NGO) and of the Gaza flotilla raid. This AFD seems premature ... <section deleted>.AMuseo (talk) 15:43, 30 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nom, or merge if there is anything of value to the flotilla raid article. Off2riorob (talk) 12:06, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep reliable and verifiable sources are provided to show that this individual has received ongoing media coverage, establishing notability. Alansohn (talk) 22:56, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Black Sea hostage crisis unless more substantial coverage of the person can be found. Let's consider the various notability guidelines first. We need to consider the general notability guideline, the basic notability criteria for people, and the special notability criteria for criminals.
  • WP:GNG requires "significant coverage", defined as "more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material". We have a small number of short articles from Turkish reliable sources, which are all about the story: Erdinç Tekir, one of the IHH members wounded on board the Mavi Marmara was in fact a terrorist. These articles are not at all interested in the person Erdinç Tekir – where and when he was born, his background, his motivations etc. – but only in the fact that his person proves an overlap between the Mavi Marmara passengers and pro-Chechen terrorists. IMO this is not "significant coverage".
  • According to WP:BASIC, "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." Given that we learn almost nothing about the man except his participation in two notable events, I argue that we have only trivial coverage.
  • Application of WP:PERPETRATOR is somewhat problematic, since it silently assumes a single perpetrator. But in the Black Sea incident Erdinç Tekir seems to be mentioned only in the context of a complete list of the hijackers (can someone verify this?). Therefore criterion 3 (which applies to the Black Sea hijacking) is not sufficient here. Criterion 2 clearly does not apply, leaving us with criterion 1: "The perpetrator is notable for something beyond the crime itself." Given that he was far from the only perpetrator in that case, and the only other thing he is arguably notable for is being wounded on board the Mavi Marmara (and the overlap I mentioned above), this does not appear sufficient.
Additional concerns are BLP and NPOV.
  • BLP (which tends to take precedence over everything else), more specifically its section WP:BLP1E, says very clearly: "Merely being in the news does not imply someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article. 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." In this case reliable sources have covered the subject only in the context of two events, but in the coverage of the first event he merely appeared on a list of 9 people (clearly not enough to establish notability), and in the second he would not have been mentioned at all had he not participated in the first. Therefore the spirit of this principle applies, as does the rationale: "Biographies in these cases can give undue weight to the event and conflict with neutral point of view." (See next items.) In this case BLP advises: "In such cases, it is usually better to merge the information and redirect the person's name to the event article [...]." The last sentence says: "The significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." While there is no doubt about the significance of the two events, there is no persistent coverage of Erdinç Tekir in reliable sources.
  • In its current form the article violates WP:COATRACK. It is not about the man but about the fact that there was a former terrorist on board the Mavi Marmara. (Something that Israeli sources such as the IDF had persistently claimed without any proof at all.) It's not acceptable to create a BLP article just for such a bit of information that can easily be included in another article (in fact, in several other articles).
Taking everything together, unless someone can find more detailed coverage of the Black Sea hijacking he is not notable at this time, although he comes relatively close and things could certainly change. E.g. a Turkish newspaper might decide to interview him and publish a portrait piece. BLP1E advises us to redirect the name to "the event article". Since his role in the first incident appears to have been a lot more active and significant than in the second, that's the correct redirect target. I guess Black Sea hostage crisis should also be updated with a short mention of the connection to the Gaza incident. Hans Adler 09:02, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)Comment: this is a great analysis, taking our policy on notability and such onto a higher level. -DePiep (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I may support a redirect, but I see no reason to choose Black Sea hostage crisis as a target over MV Mavi Marmara or vice versa.--brewcrewer (yada, yada) 02:50, 2 September 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Erdinç_Tekir&oldid=1069226722"