Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2015 Colorado Springs shootings


 * 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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 07:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

2015 Colorado Springs shootings

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability questionable, outside recentism.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 05:28, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 *  Keep, redirect with history or merge - The incident is prominent enough that it should be either kept, redirected with history, or merged into Planned_Parenthood. --Jax 0677 (talk) 05:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * If this tweet and this article is accurate, then it being apart of the Planned Parenthood article would be inappropriate, because it would make it NOT the target, just a location.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 05:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Not accurate, however, as a careful reading of the Townhall piece as updated shows. Tvoz / talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 *  Comment - Assuming that Planned Parenthood is not relevant, then this can be redirected to List of shootings in Colorado. --Jax 0677 (talk) 07:01, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Completely notable as this is a somewhat unusual attack Rossbawse (talk) 05:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - This will definitely be a notable event in the abortion debate that has been strengthening more recently with the Planned Parenthood 2015 undercover videos controversy. 75.80.175.107 (talk) 05:47, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Except current facts state that the shooting had nothing to do with Planned Parenthood itself, but rather it was the place the shooter ducked for cover after a robbery gone wrong at the Chase Bank. This would be dishonest and go against sources.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 06:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 *  Reply - Then someone had better update the article to mention Chase Bank. --Jax 0677 (talk) 06:16, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Really? Well, blame the articles at the time; they never mentioned such a thing. 75.80.175.107 (talk) 06:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those were not "current facts". Tvoz / talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Noteworthy, and still a current event. I think the title should associate it with PP though, if only to differentiate it from other mass shootings in Colorado Springs this year (e.g., Oct 31). Poindexter Propellerhead (talk) 05:54, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Again, it has nothing to do with PP itself, according to sources at the moment, and it would be misleading.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 06:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree with Poindexter et al. The tweet cited above as evidence was early and shown to be untrue - he was inside Planned Parenthood. And the Townhall piece, also largely based on unconfirmed tweets, clearly says in comments attributed to the police spokeswoman, not tweeters, that while motive is not yet determined, the event started and ended at PP. The Chase Bank claim was an early unconfirmed report that was discounted later on.  Tvoz / talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You're right, information has changed, but I don't see it as having changed enough establish notability to an encyclopedia. We are not a news site. WikiNews is.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 06:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  06:36, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep Wikipedia policies should not be taken to obvious absurdity. It would be wise to withdraw this nomination. --I am One of Many (talk) 06:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Please give this at least a week - there is likely to be a political connection between protests outside the clinic and the shooting in the clinic. This is almost certainly set to have significant political ramifications for Planned Parenthood and the abortion debate in the United States. -- Callinus (talk) 07:02, 28 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - Noteworthy and newsworthy. WP:BREAKING would advise waiting a little longer, but there's quite a lot of news coverage on it right now that I don't think we need to wait for more evidence of notability. GabeIglesia (talk) 07:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Nomination Withdrawn as it's WP:SNOW-y. Will revisit soon if lasting notability doesn't present itself.  True CRaysball  | #RaysUp 07:39, 28 November 2015 (UTC)


 * 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.