[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Carrett

Add links
From 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 redirect to Piazza Fontana bombing due to a lack of notability independent from that event. It's unclear what, if anything, could be merged - therefore, any merging from the history would be an editorial matter.  Sandstein  08:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

David Carrett

[edit]
David Carrett (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Nominating in order to reach consensus. While Carrett might be an evil man whom all should be warned against (through wikipedia, no less), the fact seemingly remains that he's only notable for 1 event. The bombing surely deserves a page, and Carrett surely deserves mention (and a redirect)... The reason I am nominating is that author of article seems quite new and enthusiastic, and a little miffed that his article was redirected, so in the spirit of WP:BITE, here goes. Storkk (talk) 09:21, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge and Delete: as the fellow responsible for the redirect. The article creator claims numerous foreign language sources for this alleged conspiracy, but so far seems to be pushing hard a POV in several articles to claim dire roles for Mr. Carrett, the refs in question don't actually seem to say so beyond the bare (and trivial) mention that among others, Carrett is under suspicion. See diff [1]. WP:BLP generally, and WP:BLP1E specifically, mandates we tread very lightly, and so far no reliable sources claim anything beyond that Carrett was one of those indicted by an Italian court for this 40 year old bombing. All sources turning up his name so far are trivial mentions as per WP:BIO.  Ravenswing  09:49, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hypothetical question: were he ever convicted, would that change your opinion on redirect? --Storkk (talk) 15:14, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not Redirect and maintain. "David Carrett" may not even be his real name but his "nom de guerre". But even so...? Yep I claim 3 articles (written in italian, a "foreign language" that could be translated with several online free translations softwares) from La Repubblica, the most sold italian newspaper, but also an article written on The Guardian (in english!):

Absolutely Trustworthy (talk) 10:05, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think he's trying to convey that nobody knows whether his last name is "Carrett," "Carret," or "Garrett". Again, i know next to nothing about this, so take it with a grain of salt. --Storkk (talk) 15:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This guy is a secret agent NOT a politician... of course I do NOT know what this guy real name is and which one of his nom de guerre is the right one (maybe "Carrett"?). I do NOT know if this guy is still alive or not. That's why I think this article should be published: in order to globally convey as much info about him as possible. Anyway keeping on insinuating that La Repubblica italian newspaper publishes trivial and not reliable stuff is starting to get "heavy" towards italians in general I think, and towards the judge Guido Salvini that has prosecuted him in 1998. Do you know how Giovanni Falcone and Paolo Borsellino italian judges ended up in 1992? Sacrificing their lives for justice. As I said in our discussion pages there are plenty of free translations softwares around. If you are really interested about getting the truth in the whole discussion and/or if I find spare time and/or if you ask me kindly I can translate the three articles for you (computing translations are not good enough I guess).Absolutely Trustworthy (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Note that WP:BLP1E mainly concerns Living people... Also, although it is a notability guideline, a main point of reasoning behind it is that people notable for one event generally do not have enough reliable, verifiable information about them to warrant an article to themselves. Gavrilo Princip is quite dead, and there is a ton of independent, verifiable, reliable information about him simply because of his clear historical significance. Of course, WP:COMMON SENSE also applies for people such as Princip (his action set off WWI, after all) as well as Sirhan Sirhan, etc. Again, grain of salt, 2 cents, etc. --Storkk (talk) 15:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I find it very strange that NOONE has mentioned Abu Hafiza so far... Do we all want to give a real answer to terrorism in general living and maintaning democratic dialectics and open societies in the countries and the world where we live in? Do we want to follow Karl Popper heritage or not? In my personal internet surfing about the matter I found this interesting web page State-Sponsored Terror in the Western World. Please read it if you have a chance and also remember that the anthrax attacks have NOT been solved yet (The other two wikipedia users that have voted so far "sound" from U.S). Absolutely Trustworthy (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply: I recommend you review WP:NOT, particularly Wikipedia is not a soapbox. The sole purpose and point of this AfD is to rule on whether an article on this subject passes verification and notability standards. It is not, and Wikipedia is not, for education about terrorism, maintaining open societies, following anyone's "heritage," or any other irrelevancy. It is sure as hell not about globally disseminating information about him: in like fashion, Wikipedia is not a webhost, and no doubt you can put up your own website to publish whatever about this fellow you wish out there.  Ravenswing  09:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:Soapbox? Huh? Ok  Ravenswing  I think I am going to ignore from now on your attempts to offend me... You have ignored most of my points anyway... BTW if you search for "David Carrett" on the French Wikipedia you will find two entries (Attentat de la piazza Fontana and Gladio) that have this guys name hyperlinked but the article is not existing. Please check for yourself [3]. From my humble point of view this means that according to french wikipedians the article is NEEDED. Absolutely Trustworthy (talk • contribs) 10:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply: Or, probably more accurately, it means that while the French Wikipedia's editors might feel his name worth mentioning in the main article concerning the bombing (a stance with which I agree), Carrett can't sustain a standalone article. In any event, I'm inclined to let them make their own decisions about what notability and verification standards they themselves wish to see.  Ravenswing  13:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply: I'd be interested in your basis for asserting that Carrett has an internationally notable career, or indeed a notable career on any level. Heck, I'd be interested in your basis for asserting that he even exists.  Ravenswing  09:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Dear Kodster. As I said in David Carrett discussion page [4] also Abu Hafiza should go for AfD then because of WP:BLP1E. Anyway your "simple google search" using "David Carrett" keywords will return you 56 million results (and, no, I did NOT find this AfD at the the fifth place result). Again, as I pointed out in "David Carrett" discussion page the keywords should be more specific... Have you tried "David Carrett" CIA Piazza Fontana" keywords for example? This last search [5] will return 1,040 results... whereas the search for "Abu Hafiza psychiatrist" keywords[6] will return *ONLY* 293 results. This should make people think (for those who have this target obviously). Thanks for your attention. Absolutely Trustworthy (talk) 10:24, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply: Could we please have some non-slanted methodology, please? Googling David + Carrett turns up every hit that has either word. Googling the phrase "David Carrett" turns up many, many, many fewer hits. That aside, I'm still trying to figure out why you keep pushing the irrelevant Abu Hafiza in this discussion; it's a classic straw man argument to insinuate that their relative notability is linked. Beyond that, I still have neither seen (a) any reason why WP:BLP1E does not apply, nor (b) any biographical information on Carrett whatsoever.  Ravenswing  10:51, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep After there's been a chance gven to build up the article, merging might be sensible, but likely might not. This book in Italian (neither in the English nor the Italian article's refs) on the bombing mentions him on 5 pages, all but one viewable, spelling name with one "t". Probably a good source for the main article too.John Z (talk) 04:33, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Sean Whitton / 11:51, 25 July 2008 (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/David_Carrett&oldid=1137768513"