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. — Aitias // discussion 21:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Temba Tsheri

[edit]

Non-notable and/or poorly sourced. Just because a person is first or youngest or oldest does not justify a Wikipedia article by itself. Merge this all all other "First" articles with the appropriate complete article on Mount Everest. And 1 clearly biased online source is not suitable for reliability standards. Age Happens (talk) 07:34, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Mount Everest, and by merge, I mean a sentence or two. Clear-cut case of WP:ONEEVENT - write about the event, not the individual. The event probably is notable, though. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 07:46, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are all clear WP:BIO1E deletion candidates. Possibly they should just all be merged with Mount Everest: Age Happens (talk) 08:38, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all except Marty Hoey, which makes no real assertion of notability (no first or fastest or anything). Just delete that one. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 09:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - What would we use for criteria on this? WP:ATHLETE? If so, it could be argued that climbing Everest is competing at the highest level of mountaineering. Grandmartin11 (talk) 16:15, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I think WP:ONEEVENT is imminently more applicable. If any of these people had notable long-standing careers as climbers (and I'm sure they're all career climbers, emphasis in that last statement on the word notable), if they had topped Kilimanjaro and McKinley and what have you, then I think WP:ATHLETE might be applicable. But there's not any evidence right now that it is. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 03:39, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per Nosleep. Symplectic Map (talk) 02:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Temba Tsheri. A Google News search shows that he is also notable as an environmental[1][2] and anti-war[3] (library card or trial access required) campaigner. I'm not too happy with the bundling of all these articles in a nomination based on WP:ONEEVENT, as checking whether that applies needs to be done separately for each article subject, and there is no interdependence. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:18, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I note that Mount Everest is currently 72 kilotyes long, so if some or all of these articles are to be merged then it might be better to create a spinoff article with a title such as Mount Everest records. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:33, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Pemba Dorjie. None of the sources found by Google News or Google Books appears to say more than that the subject held the record, and that there was a minor spat about whether someone else broke it a few days later. I can read enough English, Spanish, German, Portuguese, Polish, Italian and French to confirm that the sources in those languages don't say any more, which just leaves one each in Hungarian[4], Vietnamese[5] and Romanian[6], none of which mentions the subject in the headline, and all of which appear to mention the ascent time in close proximity to the subject's name. I have only searched in the Latin alphabet. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Moni Mulepati. Has some additional notability as an author[7]. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Leszek Cichy. The article already describes his second claim to notability, confirmed here. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:17, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Marco Siffredi. The article lists under "further reading" a 400-page biography of the subject published by a non-vanity publisher. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:31, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Francys Arsentiev. Her record-breaking achievement, her death, and the recovery of her body are all separate events. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Lobsang Tshering either to Mount Everest or to a new article Deaths on Mount Everest, unless sources can be found in a non-Latin script or under a different transliteration. My old friends Google Books and Google News don't seem to come up with any more than the fact of his death under this spelling. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep of Pasang Lhamu Sherpa (but with a move to Pasang Lhamu). The third paragraph of the article says it all. Loads of book coverage, with this explaining the significance of her posthumous award. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Jozef Psotka. Has an entry in the Slovak National Biography. And yes, it is about this Jozef Psotka - the snippet displayed in the Google Books results says that he's a "horolezec" (climber). Phil Bridger (talk) 21:19, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Marty Hoey. Has plenty of coverage in books and the press, which contains more information than just her fateful climb, and also was honoured by having a new, more secure, knot named after her.[8] Phil Bridger (talk) 21:42, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I believe that my comments above have shown that these articles can't all be debated in a single nomination, as each subject has a separate claim to notability. Different people could well have different combinations of articles that they support keeping, deleting or merging, and we'll end up with a total mess that will be impossible for any admin to evaluate. I would suggest closing this and opening separate AfDs for any of the articles that the nominator, or anyone else, still thinks should be deleted. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Further comment. I'm aware that my evaluation of these article subjects could be affected by systemic bias - the ones for which I couldn't find sources necessary for a "keep" are ones for which we could expect many sources not to be in the Latin alphabet. I'd also request that nobody tells me that I should be adding all of the sources that I found to the articles - I've spent my whole evening just looking for the sources, so I would hope that, in the spirit of collaboration, someone takes up the baton. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:58, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete pernom or merge in a sentence as noted above. This is all wp:1event: clear-cut. Eusebeus (talk) 03:30, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. And what about all the other claims to notability that I mentioned above? Phil Bridger (talk) 09:43, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Pembo Dorije. If this statement is true: "His climb is considered one of the greatest feats in mountaineering" then there is no question about notability. IMHO ONEEVENT is there to avoid having an article about a career nurse who briefly shot into fame due to one night stand with a rock star or something. It's not supposed to prevent having an article about someone who made a single outstanding contribution in their field. Are one-hit wonders ONEEVENT? Stevage 04:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - please note that I specifically did not include climbers' articles who were also noted as having climbed other peaks, especially the famous Seven Peaks. Those individuals would indeed qualify under WP:ATHLETE but the ones noted above are not noted except for a single event, setting only one minor record in an Everest climb or dying there. The intent of [[[WP:ONEEVENT]] is clear, write about the event not the person. In this case, the event has a page already - Mount Everest and a section therein devoted to "various records" which is where most of the above should be listed. I concur that perhaps a separate page for Mount Everest Climbing Records or similar would also work. But as it stands, all of the above are One-event and quite clearly so. Just because they are listed elsewhere is not sufficient, since "elsewhere" may not have the same standard. We do have a standard, and it should either be adhered to or thrown out. And to answer Stevage, The songs in the one-hit wonders are One Event, but as an event they are suitable for an article. However, the band members who participated in the one-hit wonder fall under WP:ONEEEVENT and thus are not suitable under the Wikipedia guidelines.Age Happens (talk) 11:31, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. For nearly all of these subjects I have expicitly refuted the claim that they fall under WP:ONEVENT, by showing independent reliable sources that cover other activities, including in one case the very achievement that you refer to. And coverage elsewhere is the very basis of notability, provided that the "elsewhere" is substantial coverage in independent reliable sources, which I have shown for all of the subjects for which I gave a "keep" opinion. Phil Bridger (talk) 14:35, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we have to take your objections one at time then? Very well.

Your objection to Temba Tsheri is that he is, you claim, also "notable as an environmental and anti-war campaigner" which seems rather a leap of logic. Temba Tsheri signed a petition (which was signed by thousands of people and included over 70 worldwide organizations) and was mentioned (only mentioned, not featured) in some articles about the petitions. How, exactly, is that notable? Anyone can sign a petition. The only reason Temba Tsheri is even mentioned as one of the co-petitioners is because of the... WP:ONEVENT. We're back to square one. Notability for one event. And the Wikipedia guidelines for one event are quite clear. "The general rule in many cases is to cover the event, not the person." The event belongs in some article about Mount Everest, not a separate article for every person involved in those one events.
Your objection to Moni Mulepati that she has some "additional notability as an author" merely begs the question. Writing a book about her one event does not qualify as additional notability. It's still all about the one event. She is still known only for that one event. Seriously? Did you read the link at all?
Your objection to Leszek Cichy is accepted. He is one of the Seven Summit climbers I noted above and I failed to remove him from the list. This one I can accept as having another notable event.
Your objection to Marco Siffredi would perhaps have gone better if you'd googled Antoine Chandellier, the author of the biography which you claim makes him notable for more than one event. Siffredi was Chandellier's good friend. A biography written by a good friend after the subject dies is hardly a reliable and independent source.
In the case of Francys Arsentiev you claim that her record, her death and the recovery of her body are all separate events. Well, I suppose. In the sense that each breath you take is a separate event from the previous ones. This is just silly. She died during the same event. Just that single event. The recovery, such as it was, of her body was the result of... that same one event. She is know only for that one event. Nothing else. They aren't separate events. They're the same event.
You object to Pasang Lhamu Sherpa because she is famous in Nepal? Again. You're begging the question. She is famous in Nepal for... being the first Nepali woman to climb Mount Everest. The third paragraph which "says it all" as you claim, only lists a posthumous Nepali award, a Nepali statue, a Nepali postage stamp and a Nepali road, a Nepali strain of wheat and a minor Nepal mountain in her honor? Why were these things awarded to her? Her one event. It's the same thing. One event. A person known only for one event. That event means she's known in Nepal, of course. And commemorated in Nepal for... that one event. Sorry, no joy on this one either.
For Jozef Psotka you claim that he is known for other things. He's known as a "climber" in a Slovak biography? Seriously? See the previous person. Known for what exactly? One event. Being the oldest person to climb Mount Everest without oxygen. That's it. The other mountains listed in the article are non-notable. Hundreds of people climb them every year. Not notable. His only notable event, just one event is why he's listed. You've provided no information that he is known for any other notable event.
With Marty Hoey we're back to begging the question again. She's notable for one thing. Dying in a fall on Mount Everest because of an unsecured harness. You claim that having a knot named after her also makes her notable. Why was the knot named after her? Because it was a new, more secure knot, named in honor of her for dying because of an unsecured harness. Right back to her one event again! The other things you claim she is listed under in the goggle search are 'all in reference to her death on the mountain.

What your objections all amount to are circular arguments and the petition principii logical fallacy. All of the people you objected to, save one, are notable for one event only. The other minor things which you claim as notability don't even come close to a standard of notability in each case. I'll repeat it for you, the guideline is quite clear, in the case of one event it is the event which should be the prefered subject of the article, not the person. In each case, the event is tied to Mount Everest and there is plenty of room for the individuals above to be so listed. Except in one case, all of the above are notable for one and only event. I'm sorry, but that is simply fact. Blindly listing Google searches without closely examining the content and begging the question in nearly every case does not amount to any kind of reasonable refutation as you claim. You're grasping at straws here. Age Happens (talk) 17:36, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Time for another marathon response, which emphasises the point that putting all of these in one nomination makes proper scrutiny of each individual case difficult.

The first of the sources that I offered above for Temba Tsheri [9] focuses entirely on him and one other person as environmental activists, without even mentioning his climb of Everest, so how can you say, "The only reason Temba Tsheri is even mentioned as one of the co-petitioners is because of the... WP:ONEVENT"? It also makes it clear that he was one of the two people who presented the petition, not just one of thousands who signed it. The second source serves to confirm that this is the same Temba Tsheri.
The source that I gave for Moni Mulepati [10] is about the book, not about her climb. Just because there is a chain of events leading back to the climb doesn't make this one event. You might just as well say that Barack Obama is only notable for the one event of being elected to the Illinois senate in 1996, because everything that happened afterwards in part of a chain of events.
The Leszek Cichy case simply creates the impression that these articles were nominated without proper due diligence, such as the reading of the articles before nomination.
The 400-page biography of Marco Siffredi was written by someone close to him, as very many biographies are, but, being published by a reputable publisher, is perfectly acceptable as a source for determining notability. I have never known an article about a subject to be deleted when a whole book has been published about it.
Francys Arsentiev is a rather more marginal case, and I'll retract the statement about her death being a separate event from her climb, but I would still argue that the recovery of her body is a separate event. References in the article focus specifically on the recovery. Again, a chain of events is not one event.
WP:BIO#Any biography says that, "the person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them" is a ground for notability. How does Pasang Lhamu Sherpa not qualify under this criterion? The source that I linked above [11] explains how notable this award is. The fact that there is no Wikipedia article about the award reflects on our coverage of the non-Anglophone world, not on the subject's notability.
In Jozef Psotka's case, it has always been the practice at Wikipedia to have articles on people who have entries in print encyclopedias, such as national biographies. The whole point of not being paper is that we should at least as inclusive as print encyclopedias, and the point of notability is that we rely on the judgment of the publishers of independent reliable sources to decide what to include.
The book coverage of Marty Hoey that I linked to includes coverage of events other than her death, such as [12] and [13]. If you want to shell out $3.95 or $7.90 you might also want to check out some news articles from before her death[14].
Finally I would ask you to retract the statement that I was "blindly listing Google searches without closely examining the content". Doesn't my analysis of Pemba Dorjie above show that that is untrue? Phil Bridger (talk) 19:28, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unbundle and relist separately I stand by my merge all above, but it doesn't seem at this point that the bundling is a fair process. Nosleep ^{break my slumber} 21:16, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Jozef Psotka separately. WP:BIO1E? Psotka climbed more eight-thousanders, as far as I know. He was the first Slovak mountaineer on the summit of Mount Everest (together with Demjan). He is considered one of the most famous Slovak climbers and deserves own article. I've added more links and citation, the article undoubtedly has room for improvement. --Vejvančický (talk) 12:57, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Some of the articles are available in different languages Wikipedia and sources are available as shown in this discussion. The idea of merging some of the articles is interesting, but we should preserve the information so we can discuss each article individually. --J^mundo 19:39, 16 May 2009 (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.