Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deaths of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 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 withdraw for reasons discussed below. Paul MacDermott (talk) 23:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Deaths of Nicola Hughes and Fiona Bone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I'm nominating this for deletion for three reasons; a) Wikipedia is not a newspaper and most of the information here just now is of a journalistic nature; b) IT's far too soon for this article to exist, the event happened yesterday, and ;c) a similar article was speedily deleted yesterday. Quite simply, everything about this article is news and speculation, and it should not be here less than 36 hours after the event. Paul MacDermott (talk) 17:44, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep There is no such policy as "this is too soon." When school shootings happen, we have an article. When there are significant hurricanes, we have an article. When there is significant shooting/bombing in Israel or Iraq or wherever, we have a shooting. This is a highly significant event for the UK - the first time two female PCs have been killed on duty. The article is very well soured, and very NPOV as far as I can see. There's no speculation, unless you can show me because all I can see is fact with sources. doktorb wordsdeeds 17:47, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That seems to be a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument to me. What you say is correct; the article is well-sourced and the event significant, but at this stage we are unlikely to know very much about the incident other than the fact that it happened. Not to mention there are already ongoing legal proceedings against the suspect concerning another case. This may become encyclopedic at a future time, but I'm afraid that time isn't now. Paul MacDermott (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I respect your stance though I can't see why this particular event has taken your ire so strongly! This is a news event which ties into a lot of current and long-seated British news stories, including the on-going issue of arming the police, allowing us to expand the article with a number of others to avoid it becoming an orphan. Of course there's a little bit of OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but that's just me trying to show that news events are often turned into articles almost immediately, it's part of the way things seem to go these days. Given the nature of the killings, the character of the person who did the killing, and the wider context into which it fits, I can't agree that this article is worth removing. Indeed it seems that there's a bit of bias and undue weight creeping in to the reasoning. Is the fact that these two dead PCs are British making it easier to dismiss the artice? doktorb wordsdeeds 18:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't say it's taken my ire, though I was extremely shocked to see it here so soon, particularly after a similar article was deleted last night, and as I'm from the UK, I've seen the news reports (e.g., a significant chunk of BBC News was devoted to it this evening) so know it's a significant event here. As I said above I believe it will become encyclopedic - maybe it will lead to the routine arming of police officers in the UK, for example - but we simply don't have anything to report right now other than basic news facts. It should also be remembered that there will be legal proceedings resulting from this, and as such there are likely to be restrictions on what can be reported, even at trial, where the rules of evidence may mean that the full picture does not emerge in open court. In any case such as this - and maybe even more so here - there will be a lot of interest and speculation from the press, and it may be difficult to sift out the true facts.
- I respect your stance though I can't see why this particular event has taken your ire so strongly! This is a news event which ties into a lot of current and long-seated British news stories, including the on-going issue of arming the police, allowing us to expand the article with a number of others to avoid it becoming an orphan. Of course there's a little bit of OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but that's just me trying to show that news events are often turned into articles almost immediately, it's part of the way things seem to go these days. Given the nature of the killings, the character of the person who did the killing, and the wider context into which it fits, I can't agree that this article is worth removing. Indeed it seems that there's a bit of bias and undue weight creeping in to the reasoning. Is the fact that these two dead PCs are British making it easier to dismiss the artice? doktorb wordsdeeds 18:09, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- That seems to be a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument to me. What you say is correct; the article is well-sourced and the event significant, but at this stage we are unlikely to know very much about the incident other than the fact that it happened. Not to mention there are already ongoing legal proceedings against the suspect concerning another case. This may become encyclopedic at a future time, but I'm afraid that time isn't now. Paul MacDermott (talk) 18:02, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A sad story, but this is routine news, and has not yet shown the depth and bredth of scholarly coverage necessary to maintain an article, per WP:NOTNEWS If this becomes the subject of significant interest over a longer period of time, or becomes a major international story with worldwide coverage, this may be revisited. Right now, however, this looks more like a Wikinews story than a Wikipedia article. --Jayron32 17:53, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Enduring notability with it being the first time two female police officers were killed in the UK. Easily passes WP:GNG. Lugnuts And the horse 17:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep To suggest that this article be deleted is ridiculous.(A. Carty (talk) 19:21, 19 September 2012 (UTC))[reply]
- Comment OK guys, I'm gonna withdraw this because something tells me it'll end up as a WP:SNOW keep. We have articles on other police officers killings, such as Sharon Beshenivsky, and this is a rare incident in UK terms. I am unhappy at the timeframe by which this was created and would have liked a to see a few more days pass before seeing it here, but that's how it goes, I guess. The investigation into this is ongoing, and a second arrest was made this evening, so I suggest treading with caution. This matter is further complicated by the involvement of a suspect in another case. I'm going to add this to my watchlist, and if any problems develop it may have to come back here, or go forward for closer scrutiny by those in charge. Paul MacDermott (talk) 23:19, 19 September 2012 (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.