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 delete. The CRIME /IE arguments trump GNG ones. This should be covered at the article about the crime. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:45, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Laurence Powell[edit]

Laurence Powell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Per WP:CRIME, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP1E. No standalone notability to warrant an article of their own. All coverage of the subject revolves solely around the rodney king beating. The subject has not gone on to become notable for anything else. Continuing coverage of the subject looks to only be WP:ROUTINE where are they now type stuff that covers all the figures of the incident and not this subject individually (e.g., [1]). Sulfurboy (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Sulfurboy (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Rodney King. KidAd (talk) 23:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now - this AfD is surely only being brought about because of the discussion on the AfD of Derek Chauvin. This page and Stacey Koon are part of the discussion. That deletion is being reviewed. Any decision here should wait until that review is finished. Kire1975 (talk) 02:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• We don't keep pages because a separate deletion is under review. Further, that deletion review is an examination of procedural issues and is not a consideration that would change any sort of notability standard. If you have a policy based reason for a keep or can demonstrate clearly how this passes notability guidelines, I'd love to hear it. However, I'm not seeing anything here and the subject was allowed years to cultivate standalone notability. There is none. Sulfurboy (talk) 17:55, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep WP:1E says,

If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate. The assassins of major political leaders, such as Gavrilo Princip, fit into this category, as indicated by the large coverage of the event in reliable sources that devotes significant attention to the individual's role.

When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, an independent article may not be needed, and a redirect is appropriate. For example, George Holliday, who videotaped the Rodney King beating, redirects to Rodney King. On the other hand, if an event is of sufficient importance, even relatively minor participants may require their own articles, for example, Howard Brennan, a witness to the JFK assassination.

• The events around King are hugely important. This article clearly meets the standard set by Haward Brennan.Casprings (talk) 19:14, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, WP:CRIME, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP1E all apply here, as noted, unless someone can add substantive sources that discuss anything notable he's done that's independent of the King case. Outrage doesn't trump BLP, even for this. Guy (help!) 20:34, 6 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and/or Redirect per Guy. If there's no other coverage, it's WP:CRIME/WP:BLP1E. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:34, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @JzG and Rhododendrites: What are you talking about there is a coverage problem? Per the links provided above, there is signficant coverage in both books and academic articles. See https://www.google.com/search?tbs=bks:1&q=%22Laurence+Powell%22+-wikipedia and https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=%22Laurence+Powell%22 . Not to mention the other sources. Let's remember, notability is determined by available sources and not current sources in an article. This clearly meets the standard for a stand along article under WP:1E.Casprings (talk) 16:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• You're not responding to the pages we both linked to. It's not a question of amount of coverage. If that were the case I'd say "fails GNG" or whatnot. The issue is WP:CRIME and WP:BLP1E (not necessarily WP:1E). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 16:32, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Casprings, Wikipedia is, by design, conservative about biographies. We should never be the first place on the internet to have a biography of anyone, so we don't allow biographies of people who did one shitty thing once. Guy (help!) 18:17, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JzGCare to cite the policy source for, "We should never be the first place on the internet to have a biography of anyone." I think the relavent policy is WP:1E and in the end, it is a subjective call. Is the event of enough historical importance, as judged by coverage by WP:RS, that participates might require an article. I think the answer is yes here.Casprings (talk) 20:34, 11 June 2020 (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.