Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackson Hinkle

Jackson Hinkle

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Jackson Hinkle (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)

All of the reliable sources about Hinkle are passing mentions and paragraphs that mention his anti-Israel and right-wing advocacy on Twitter. Very few sources actually establish his notability as a person in detail. The VICE article mostly describes Haz and his far-right movement rather than Hinkle itself.

Can potentially be kept or restored at a later date if sources adequately tackle Hinkle in being the sole subject of an article but at the moment I believe he fails to be considered notable. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 23:59, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Television, Conservatism, Conspiracy theories, Environment, Internet, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

1) “All of the reliable sources about Hinkle are passing mentions and paragraphs that mention his anti-Israel and right-wing advocacy on Twitter. Very few sources actually establish his notability as a person in detail.” There are numerous reliable sources that are directly about Hinkle (not passing mentions) that establish his notability as a person. These sources are more than enough to meet the WP:N requirement that’s being called into question. Additionally, WP:BASIC states: “People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.” Here is a list of the sources currently referenced in the article that meet the above criteria:

1. [1] Hinkle's beliefs regarding MAGA Communism
2. [2] Debate between Hinkle and Sam Seder (Hinkle is also referred to as a "Marxist" here.)
3. [3] Discussion between Hinkle and Tucker Carlson on Tucker Carlson Tonight
4. [4] Hinkle as a teenager
5. [5] Hinkle's activism against pollution
6. [6] Interview with Hinkle running in a local election
7. [7] Story about Hinkle's drive to create affordable living, reduce homelessness, and a sustainable environment
8. [8] Hinkle's receives and responds to criticism during his campaign
9. [9] Another interview with Hinkle running in a local election
10. [10] Reviewing just how progressive Hinkle is
11. [11] Hinkle discusses Russia/Ukraine conflict with Piers Morgan
12. [12] Description of Hinkle's experience in Russia, brief description of beliefs
13. [13] Disagreements between Hinkle and Laura Loomer about the Israel/Palestine conflict
14. [14] Description of Hinkle's relationship with Anna Linnikova, brief description of beliefs

Even if “all of the reliable sources about Hinkle are passing mentions” (which I have shown above is incorrect), WP:BASIC says “If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.” This means that even if there weren’t any sources directly about Hinkle, this article would still be notable as a result of multiple independent sources.

Out of the sources that are directly about Hinkle, only 7% (just one) of them are about his anti-Israel advocacy. And only 1 of these sources reference his advocacy as “right-wing”. To reduce the sources of this article to being “anti-Israel” and “right-wing advocacy on Twitter” is incorrect.

But even if you include the sources where Hinkle isn’t the center of the article, only 31% (11/36) of them are about his anti-Israel advocacy. This means it's inaccurate to write that “all of the reliable sources...mention his anti-Israel and right-wing advocacy”.

It’s also an oversimplification to say he is “right-wing”. There is a variety of coverage about Hinkle and he is not universally characterized as being “right-wing”. Only 1 article describes him as right-wing, 2 articles describe him as Marxist, 2 articles describe him as conservative, 1 article describes him as progressive, 1 article describes him as “MAGA”, and 2 articles avoid giving him a label.

2) “The VICE article mostly describes Haz and his far-right movement rather than Hinkle itself.” The VICE article is about what “MAGA Communism” means. It gives near equal weight to “Haz” and Hinkle and directly says that Hinkle's involvement with MAGA Communism is “alongside Haz”. Additionally, the VICE article does not say that MAGA Communism is a “far-right movement” which means that the assertion violates WP:OR. Alleycat1995 (talk) 04:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

• Keep Passes WP:N as of now. Shankargb (talk) 10:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)