Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Riverview killings


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

2018 Riverview killings

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:NOTNEWS. As tragic as they are, familicides happen literally every day on this planet, and this incident doesn't seem all that different from the others. Many, if not all of the sources are local, and it doesn't appear to have been extensively covered by national media sources. Just a run-of-the-mill, ordinary crime. Love of Corey (talk) 03:51, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — hueman1 ( talk  •  contributions ) 04:27, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. — hueman1 ( talk  •  contributions ) 04:27, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. — hueman1 ( talk  •  contributions ) 04:28, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Contrary to the nomination, this particular crime has received national and international coverage. International coverage includes the Slovenian Dnevnik, Mexican Milenio, French 45secondes, Peruvian El Comercio, The South African, British The Times. Ignoring Florida media, we have many US based publications covering this, include: NY Daily News on the application of a "stand your ground" defense here, Daily Beast, CNN on the murderer questioning his surviving son at trial, Washington Post on the adoption of the child, and People magazine with a similar profile. From a perusal of the coverage, the trial itself was highly publicized and not routine.-- Eostrix  (&#x1F989; hoot hoot&#x1F989;) 07:52, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I feel like national coverage is automatic with Florida due to Florida Sunshine Law (and no, not because of Florida Man). I see New York Times, USA Today, CNN, Washington Post cover Florida-related news items like it's nothing regardless of its importance. I would tread lightly on stating it should be kept due to "national and international coverage" and more on the WP policies. – The Grid  ( talk )  17:29, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The relevant policy is WP:GNG and WP:NEVENT. Coverage here meets WP:GEOSCOPE (heck, covered in Slovenia), WP:INDEPTH, WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE, and WP:DIVERSE. Most domestic murders are not notable, and most do not receive significant coverage. This particular case, perhaps due to the televised trial, sordid details, and self-representation by the perpetrator (who actually questioned his son, whom he stabbed) received an extremely high level of coverage as evidence by any search for "Ronnie Oneal".-- Eostrix  (&#x1F989; hoot hoot&#x1F989;) 06:46, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:55, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Per The Grid's comment; we have a lot of Florida murder stories because of their sunshine law, and it takes little to no time to translate a story from there to fill column inches or a 'trending story' feature, and it's highly doubtful that Dnevnik, The South African or Milenio really added much more from the wires they got them from. Just because a story appears in an international publication doesn't indicate its true notability unless it's full and sustained coverage.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 18:46, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * This IS sustained coverage. From the news sources given in the article it actually got more coverage in 2021 than in 2018, and the news articles offer in-depth information about the trial and aftermath; for example, the CNN article mentioning that Ronnie IV had to cross-examine his own son, and Tampa Bay Times and NY Daily News mentioning the use of the stand-your-ground rule. --Coolperson177 (talk) 03:17, 21 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep I think we can say that this case has seen enough attention to be classified as notable. It's ridiculous how small crimes in the United Kingdom always even if it doesn't get to much attention gets to stay but ones in the United States always has one person trying to erase it. This case has enough information and it should be deemed worthy to stay as a wiki page. – 11S117  ( talk )  18:09, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: I have added more references to the article and per Eostrix, it seems to meet WP:SIGCOV. --Coolperson177 (talk) 02:48, 21 September 2021 (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.