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.
Delete. Sad as it is, a 14-year old killing a 13-year old on a date is by itself not notable. Does the fact that the date was arranged through Facebook make this notable? Today it would actually be more remarkable if such a date was arranged through a go-between carrying notes scribbled on
paper. The coverage in external sources is not in-depth but essentially consist of repetitions of the original, terse,
Associated Press story. --
Lambiam21:19, 18 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Partly right, partly wrong. The "date is by itself not notable". It is that it is reported in Africa, Asia, Europe, North America, Australia, etc. that it is notable.
Donotkill (
talk)
19:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Even if this were a notable murder, I see no evidence that it is known as the "2011 Facebook killing." That emphasis on the method of contact seems to be a POV slant; I removed the rather atrocious sentence from the article, "This is not the first time that Facebook has been in trouble for a murder." So it seems to be a
WP:COATRACK. postdlf (talk)
21:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete no indication of deep notability or even that anyone uses the term "2011 Facebook killing". Several of the references are literally just the same AP story reprinted in different venues. I agree with Postdlf that this may be a
WP:COATRACK of some variety.
OSbornarfcontributionatoration22:17, 18 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Please do not destroy the article. You voted for deletion then you start taking stuff out. Contrary to your claim, you did take out unique references. The Nigerian newspaper had more than the others (the beginning of the story was the same but there's several paragraphs added). Also it shows how worldwide the coverage is, USA, Canada, Nigeria, India, UK, Australia, Lithuania, etc.
Donotkill (
talk)
19:57, 19 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete. This is
a news story that is unlikely to be remembered as a historic
WP:EVENT. As others have said, it was the killing of one person who was lured by another over the Internet. Not the first time that that's happened, but in this case the medium happened to be Facebook.
Mandsford02:00, 19 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete Local news story without global notability. The means used to arrange the death is very secondary to the actual event and is only used to rabble-rouse parents and the media critics (I can imagine if we were in another age we'd be talking about deleting
1924 Murder Arranged by Ham Radio or
1673 Slaying via Smoke Signal). Otherwise it should be confined local Lithuanian Wikipedia, where it probably would have more notability (though they might delete on the same grounds there). Nate•(
chatter)05:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)reply
The vast majority of Donotkill's edits are in this topic, but there are about five as of this moment that are outside the topic. What is more relevant to the issue here is that Donotkill is the creator of the article. —C.Fred (
talk)
00:17, 20 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete - I haven't heard anything about this, and I consider myself a reasonably-well-informed American. I know that's a subjective rubric, but even so: by that standard I cannot agree that it has received significant coverage on multiple continents. It's sad, but I don't believe that it's notable. --
Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa.22:29, 19 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete. As a journalism teacher told me, "Dog bites man, not news; man bites dog, news." This is not the first time the Internet has been used as a lure to get a crime victim; other than the age of the offender, there is nothing intrinsically notable in the crime. Looking at
WP:EVENT, the three ways I see that could generate notability for this event are lasting effects, depth of coverage, and duration of coverage. However, none of these are present in this case. Accordingly, this is outside the scope of what should be at Wikipedia and should be deleted. (It's probably within the scope of Wikinews, but that's another matter entirely.) —C.Fred (
talk)
00:14, 20 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Weak Keep - I have heard about this. Sources indicates notability (in my personal opinion). But it is a close call decision... most here seems to have decided for deletion but I think I will stay with my weak keep decision. There is enough for info provided for me to feel secure in my decision.--
BabbaQ (
talk)
19:28, 22 January 2011 (UTC)reply
Delete - per
WP:NOT#NEWS. Even coverage on all continents does not grant notability. Coverage for an event must be sustained, and not brief. Several "man bites dog" news stories, thanks mostly to the internets, get brief coverage everywhere, but they are not notable either.
LonelyBeacon (
talk)
02:23, 25 January 2011 (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.