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 no consensus. I'm closing this early, as it is becoming fast apparent that we won't obtain a consensus to delete at this time. I recommend to re-evaluate the situation in a few weeks when this situation is entirely resolved and no longer headline news. This does not preclude discussion about a possible consensus-based merger to the appropriate article about the event. Sandstein 10:31, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Phillips (captain)[edit]

As much as I hate to do this, Captain Richard Philips fails WP:ONEEVENT, he only has an article here now becuase of the media attention surrounding the attempted capture of the freighter and his surrender to the Somalian pirates in exchange for his crew's safety. Therefore, I believe the article should of either be deleted or redirect and protected until this whole fiasco sorts itself out. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC) Keep! I'm a Brit.Wikipedida is one of my first port of calls when i try to look at a background to a news item. its useful. John Ellero[reply]

Delete and salt TomStar81 (Talk) 00:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MV_Maersk_Alabama#Hijacking. Known for one event, but a plausible search term. JJL (talk) 00:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now. WP:ONEEVENT seems inconsistenly enforced. See Chesley Sullenberger. Although WP:ONEEVENT is part of a hard policy, the subject's potential notability as part of a historical event (the first successful pirate attack on a US-flagged ship in months? years?) argues against hasty deletion. (JJL's suggestion about redirect is a good fallback. -- Gnoitall (talk) 00:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think that this is an important current event though I may be personally bias due to my connections with the captain. Sanitas (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.243.201 (talk) 01:07, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep Possibly important enough. I think to delete the article while the event is so unresolved is a rush to judgment. DGG (talk) 03:03, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep fore Now and maybe later - He is the focus of an international incident, although a lessor profile than Terry A. Anderson. Dinkytown 03:44, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Delete but merge into the article about the attack. The attack is the notable incident as per all the WP:RS at this time (this provides some distinction with the Sullenberger article, although I will not push that point any further). The thing about WP:OneEvent is not so much that it gives a definite answer as to the article's notability, but that it protects otherwise non-public individual biographies from veering off topic. This is a prime example. What is notable per the standards is the attack, not necessarily the individual, and any of the relevant information can be easily, and more coherently discussed in the parent attack article, rather than in this article. Shadowjams (talk) 08:01, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Certainly any other crew member of the ship would fall foul of WP:ONEEVENT, but Phillips has a major role in this major event. Over The Desk (talk) 10:05, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to the Maerske Alabama article - and create a redirect 'Alabama hijacking' to that as well (Maerske not being an easy word for some...). Captain Phillips's actions are part of the whole thing. If he does it again on another occasion, a separate article would probably be justified. Peridon (talk) 11:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per ONEEVENT and BLP concerns. Skinny87 (talk) 16:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MV Maersk Alabama, the article is way too short. 98.119.177.171 (talk) 23:39, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The Somali pirates fired at a U.S. ship. His one event could end up leading to a lot more. Jonathan321 (talk) 00:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge & Redir to MV Maersk Alabama - at the moment its a ONEEVENT, only time will tell if something further comes from the events currently playing out. For all we know, He may be the cause of further events. Attack upon bases of Piracy in Somalia ??? Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 01:44, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or redirect His name as a search term is pretty necessary -- it was necessary for me. At least keep an eye on google trends when it emerges. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jadewang (talk • contribs) 03:28, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MV Maersk Alabama. Popular and important search term, but current notability sketchy, and the article itself is very sparse. --Ye Olde Luke (talk) 05:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, with a final decision to be made after this situation is resolved.--Mr Beale (talk) 13:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the guy just got rescued, and his personal story of the entire event and rescue will be splashed all over the news for weeks. Rklawton (talk) 17:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep popular --OspreyPL (talk) 18:05, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect not enough information, and only notable for one event at the moment --Tocino 18:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, with the caveat that the article should be revisited in a month or so to verify that its as notable as we think it is. Umbralcorax (talk) 18:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep--notable as the first American taken by pirates since 1804, according to major media news reports. [1] This article will grow in sourced information as the story develops, but even after the initial news surge dies down, Phillips will remain notable for this distinction. Robert K S (talk) 18:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now There is no hurry. --rogerd (talk) 18:41, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep and expand - Phillips is now well known worldwide. Scanlan (talk) 18:43, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person is famous. Grundle2600 (talk) 19:04, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Famous does not equal WP:Notable. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 19:15, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean we can finally get rid of the stupid article on Michael Jordan's father? Rklawton (talk) 19:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note - SNOW Rklawton (talk) 19:08, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He will become an important symbol in the new age of combating piracy which started with his escape. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucideyes111 (talk • contribs) 19:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a quote to the article from U.S. President Barack Obama saying that Phillips' courage was "a model for all Americans." That sure is noteworthy! Grundle2600 (talk) 19:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the President(s) have said that phrase about quite a few people. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 22:29, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to MV Maersk Alabama - textbook WP:BLP1E, in my opinion. No need for a separate article when this content can be merged into the main one. Robofish (talk) 19:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Based on news coverage so far, subject is probably more personally notable than the event itself. Hqb (talk) 20:32, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So your saying that the Man is more notable than the news event he was wrapped up in??? Would you be able to point out anything notable he has done apart from things involved with this news event. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 22:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No. What I mean is that the news coverage has been substantially centered on the man and his actions, especially after his first escape attempt. Pirate attacks, even with hostage-taking, are a dime a dozen in that area; it's the human-interest angle that propelled this one onto the front pages. Hqb (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated previously, Famous does not equal WP:Notable. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 23:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge & Redir to MV Maersk Alabama. Not enough info to warrant a separate article unlike Chesley Sullenberger of US Airways Flight 1549 fame.--293.xx.xxx.xx (talk) 20:42, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This will be a valuable reference in the coming months on a person that will undoubtedly be very important, prominent, and relevant in U.S. culture. As his relevance diminishes (if it diminishes?), possibly reconsider deletion at a later date. Per notability guidelines, "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." I don't think Richard Phillips's major role in this event is in question; the only justification for deletion at this point is whether the event is considered "highly significant." I think it is, but especially so early, it's impossible to say that it's not to the point of justifying a decision in favor of deletion. --TonyV (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You realize your talking in the Future Tense. "will be", "will undoubtedly be" ... would it not make sense to merge to save information, then if it plays out as you forsee, it can be spunout into a standalone Article. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 22:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think this person is an important aspect of the overall piracy situation in that part of the world; a situation which appears to be expanding in importance and newsworthiness. The Phillips event is already being used as a justification for more aggressive responses to the piracy. We haven't seen the last of this "hero"; he could be elected Senator tomorrow. Mr.grantevans2 (talk) 21:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Don't delete for now - there's gonna be a book deal and Oprah appearances. You'll see. -- Y not? 21:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge for now, without prejudice for recreation if he achieves the fame of Sullenberger, as noted as above. This guy clearly fails WP:ONEEVENT, as he is only notable for this event. I can't stress this enough: all articles about this subject are on the hijacking, not on the man himself. Until someone provides multiple links to reliable sources about this guy himself, this deserves deletion. Bsimmons666 (talk) 21:34, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you actually look at the articles cited? This one from the BBC and this one from the NYT are all about the man and his family. Hqb (talk) 23:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you actually read the Articles? They would WP:Verify his existence, yes. But where is it that they state what makes him WP:Notable in his own right? Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 23:48, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I dun know, I think surviving a pirate attack is pretty notable. Not only that, his face is plastered all across the globe right now. It's a safe bet you can get PLENTY of sources to back up his notability and that is without "captain" or "Capt." in front of it Rgood erm ote 00:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find a single one that does not mention him in the context of the events that involve the Hijacking, that would be a strong argument for his Notability. Otherwise it is WP:BLP1E. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 00:22, 13 April 2009 (UTC

Chesley Sullenberger. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs and , Jimmy Wales, just give it time, a bio will come out very shortly and regardless, the things I listed are pretty much of people only known for one event and finally, WP:BLP1E says that if the person is known for an event that is historical they are allowed to have an article based off them. This person has done something historic in his own way, which is survive the first pirate attack on an American vessel in 300 years. If that isn't historical enough to warrant an article, then nothing is. Rgood erm ote 00:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If any captured American is worthy of a Wikipedia article, Richard Phillips is definately one. --JAYMEDINC (talk) 23:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: Chesley Sullenberger. Rgood erm ote 23:56, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete! Absolutely no long term notoriety. See WP:NOT#NEWS. Relevant info is already in the other articles about the ship. No need for an article like this for a person lacking absolutely no long term notoriety. Corpx (talk) 01:54, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. What justifies Chesley Sullenberger's article if this person is, as some say, "non-notable"? Phillips' action is notable, and he made the front page on The New York Times website after being freed earlier today. Just because he will not receive further press coverage in the future does not justify a deletion of the article, or I think Cho Seung-hui's article could have been deleted quite some time ago. Imhyunho (talk) 02:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - Per Imhyunho. Gage (talk) 02:26, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: I can't believe it's nominated for deletion. Daniel Christensen (talk) 02:53, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to MV Maersk Alabama per WP:ONEEVENT. Nick-D (talk) 03:38, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MV Maersk Alabama per WP:ONEEVENT. --Torsodog^Talk 04:10, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MV Maersk Alabama per WP:ONEEVENT. WWGB (talk) 04:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, at least - Phillips was the first American taken by pirates since the early 19th century - we'll see how significant that is as events unfold over a longer time period. Seethaki (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 05:41, 13 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. If he's nn in a year, then nominate the article again. Chonak (talk) 07:00, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to MV Maersk Alabama per WP:ONEEVENT.ALR (talk) 08:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Professor water (talk) 08:56, 13 April 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.