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The result was keep, withdrawn‎ – looks like there's a decent amount of coverage under more than one name, which is probably why I couldn't find much :) theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 23:30, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Container Bob (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Looks like a WP:BLP1E fail to me; this was a fairly short news story in 2001, which is made mildly more interesting by some post-9/11 hysteria but still doesn't get any lasting or other notability. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 19:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Egypt, Italy, and Canada. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 19:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep. WP:BLP1E C1-2 are clearly met, but I'm concerned about C3 as it seems like his role in the incident was substantial and well-documented. There was some additional coverage in 2002[1][2] and 2006[3]. He's also mentioned in some government reports (both US and Canada) and scholarly articles[4] about maritime / shipping container security, and in an article (not in-depth coverage of him) in 2014.[5] Zzz plant (talk) 00:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment all the sourcing says container boy. This seems to be maybe notable (maybe convert into an event article?) is there a reason we're calling this Bob or is this a 13 year uncorrected typo? PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huh! Maybe that's what made source searching difficult, but I'm still not convinced by the sources above to meet the even higher NEVENT bar. The first three are opinion columns, government reports usually don't confer notability, a mention might but i don't see any new facts, and shallow coverage doesn't confer notability. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:16, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Like, if this is "substantial and well-documented" coverage, most flash-in-the-pan news stories would pass BLP1E. theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 03:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hence why I did not vote as I didn't check myself for notability. Just saying "maybe". Just noting the typo. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PARAKANYAA, you speak French to a certain extent, right? Because of the Canadian connection I've found vague references to a few French-language sources. I've only been able to get to two so far, because my computer is going through a bit of an anglophone phase, but do you reckon there's anything usable in these? [6][7] The second one is about a novel by Nicolas Dickner, so obviously unusable for facts, but might point to the event still being referenced by popular media over ten years later. Depending on what it says, of course.

Also sorry, theleekycauldron, but I've added some more modern/academic sources that I think are okay, so I'm making you do the source analysis all over again. I'm kind of with you that I'm not completely convinced this should be a standalone article, but given all the passing mentions over ten years on, the lack of a good merge target, and the fact that this information does seem useful to have somewhere... I'm torn. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 10:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 00:58, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Probably enough to keep the article, I can pull up a few newspaper articles [8]. I'm not sure what happened lately, but the individual got enough coverage at the time for notability. It's not simply about finding a "guy in a box", there was some discussion over security at the ports that allowed the even to happen. This shows some discussion around the event, not just the event itself. Oaktree b (talk) 23:19, 16 March 2025 (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.