Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Campbell R. Bridges

:{{la|Campbell R. Bridges}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Campbell_R._Bridges Stats])

:({{Find sources|Campbell R. Bridges}})

Notability is derived from WP:ONEEVENT, an event that itself is of dubious notability. Ducknish (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

• Keep: Daily Telegraph Obituary = obituary in major national newspaper = automatic keep. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:You say that as if it is a rule. It is not. Death sells for papers, that doesn't make it a notable event unless it has a lasting impact. Ducknish (talk) 20:37, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:: Pretty much, yes, it is a rule, or should be. Just because he didn't play professional football... Barney the barney barney (talk) 21:14, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::Just because in your opinion it ought to be a rule doesn't make it so. It only supports deletion by showing that all coverage of him is about his horrific death, and none of it has focused on his impact in life. Hence, WP:ONEEVENT, or WP:VICTIM. Ducknish (talk) 21:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::: Well, yes, it's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. I think you'll find it's also an opinion held by others around here. And finally, I've read the obituary and, yes, it does demonstrate notability. And quite clearly WP:ONEEVENT does not apply. It has or should have an appropriate relationship with Tsavorite and probably with tanzanite as well. It's an obituary a life story, not a news article on his murder. Mining is clearly quite important as regards the economy and history of East Africa. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::Find me one reliable outside source that discusses his life without mentioning a word about his death, and I'll listen. Until then, it still looks like nobody cared until he died. Ducknish (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::: Quite clearly you got one thing right - you aren't listening. Barney the barney barney (talk) 22:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::::I'm listening, and so far I haven't heard the evidence that would actually back your point. Ducknish (talk) 22:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::::: The evidence would appear to suggest otherwise. Barney the barney barney (talk) 23:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::Find me one reliable outside source that discusses his life without mentioning a word about his death. That's what's missing here. Ducknish (talk) 23:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::: Ducknish, you are not listening, so I'm going to say this for the benefit of those who might: "Find me one reliable outside source that discusses his life without mentioning a word about his death" is clearly not necessary and you are creating false criteria by which to delete the article. His death clearly is a significant and newsworthy aspect of his life, and perhaps if the manner of his death had been less newsworthy, he would be pushed down below the somewhat arbitrary notability line. However, since he was killed, his life has been pushed above that line, as indicated by the Telegraph obituary. His obituary focuses on his life, and mentions his death in an appropriate content ratio. And as I stated obituary in major newspaper/academic journal = automatic keep. Barney the barney barney (talk) 08:17, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

:::::::::::His life is being discussed in the same way that anyone else's would be in their obituary, There is no coverage of what he did until he died, and it's only being discussed because he died. Ducknish (talk) 22:39, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:VICTIM, had he not been horribly murdered no one would be writing a page about him. J04n(talk page) 20:54, 2 April 2013 (UTC)
• Delete as J04n pointed out, WP:CRIME applies because the article subject is "known only in connection with a criminal event". Hekerui (talk) 19:09, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
• Keep. The Daily Telegraph obituary is about Bridges' life, not his death. Such a newspaper does not publish obituaries for people on the basis of their newsworthy deaths, but because they had notable lives. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
• Keep. The discovery and exploitation of tsavorite makes him notable regardless of anything to do with his death. The very first source in the article discusses him in depth from this perspective without mentioning his death. I would have thought that that alone was enough to make Ducknish change to keep, given their "find me one reliable outside source that discusses his life without mentioning a word about his death" criterion, but if that is not enough, there is an [http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_OosAQAAIAAJ&q=tsavorite+bridges&dq=tsavorite+bridges&hl=en&sa=X&ei=489eUfLaHqOm0wXs2YHYBw&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAg article in Drum] magazine about him and tsavorite and there are [https://www.google.co.uk/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=tsavorite+bridges&btnG=#q=tsavorite+bridges&hl=en&tbm=bks&ei=E9ReUemGE-WX1AWa_IHwBQ&start=0&sa=N&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.44770516,d.d2k&fp=cd01fc7a239e9ccb&biw=948&bih=902 numerous gbook results for "tsavorite bridges"] including a snippet from a piece in Proceedings of the International Gemological Symposium, 1982 which appears to be substantial and is prior to his death. He appears to be published as a geologist (several scholar hits seem to be citing him) and there is [http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00357520903458145 a two-page article] on him in the scholarly journal Rocks and Minerals. SpinningSpark 13:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
• Keep Sources demonstrate notability apart from the circumstances surrounding his death. Miniapolis 13:59, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

: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.