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.
I see nothing in this event that strikes me as having any
LASTING effect (other than, you know, the death and stuff). Basically a combination of
NOTNEWS, and the overly undue weight given to the autism angle is a bit disconcerting as well.
Primefac (
talk) 00:00, 2 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete Concur completely with nom, nothing else to really add.
Stikkyyt/
c 00:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)reply
I would suggest to redirest this article (as the discussion was opened slightly later) and continue discussing in one place.--
Ymblanter (
talk) 07:02, 2 January 2018 (UTC)reply
I suppose, but it's also a bit more detailed (even if there is some undue wording). It doesn't really make sense to do a merge while two AFDs are going on.
Primefac (
talk) 15:28, 2 January 2018 (UTC)reply
They are both now headed to delete, probably merding the discussions is indeed not necessary.--
Ymblanter (
talk) 06:38, 3 January 2018 (UTC)reply
I closed the other discussion and redirected here. Agree that it's headed for delete so it'll probably have been pointless anyways.
ansh666 05:34, 7 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete --- And in any case, the perpetrator entry in the infobox has to go. Look in the dictionary. There has been no trial yet.
Rhadow (
talk) 00:34, 3 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTNEWS, even though this article about the incident is more comprehensive than the other. Sadly, the murders of *ONLY* four people in a mass shooting is tragically too ordinary to merit the kind of long-term coverage that would establish notability. Any meaningful content could be preserved by a merge to
Long Branch, New Jersey.
Alansohn (
talk) 03:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTNEWS. I hate living in a world where this is true, but per
WP:NCRIME a four-person shooting is far too routine to be notable. As an alternative, possibly move to draftspace in case something transpires to demonstrate
WP:LASTING notability... but either way this article should go, at least for now.
Shelbystripes (
talk) 05:00, 3 January 2018 (UTC)reply
Keep per
WP:RAPID. We have international at this time - e.g.
New Jersey boy 'murdered family and friend on New Year's Eve', BBC and coverage has been significant since 1st January to date (3rd January). Coverage might or might not die down (my BALL says the autism angle might be grounds for more coverage) - however this should be evaluated in a few months - at present the sole questionable component for GNG is LASTING - and that can't be evaluated due to the recentness of the event - hence RAPID.
Icewhiz (
talk) 08:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)reply
WP:RAPID doesn't just say to keep an article. It mentions alternatives such as moving the article to draftspace until notability is properly established. That seems applicable since there's no evidence of
WP:LASTING notability yet.
Shelbystripes (
talk) 15:43, 3 January 2018 (UTC)reply
It is possibly to Userfy, but in this case we have SIGCOV - very wide coverage. assessing LASTING here really is a matter of BALL.
Icewhiz (
talk) 16:08, 3 January 2018 (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.