Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019 Lake City shooting spree


 * 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 delete. Consensus is that this is one of these shootings that are routine in the US.  Sandstein  07:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

2019 Lake City shooting spree

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:NOTNEWS, especially in that there is little to no lasting coverage locally, let alone nationally.  Sounder Bruce  00:39, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Sadly routine news event. Reywas92Talk 03:52, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:24, 17 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:CRIME. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:43, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is not a routine event, and it may actually merit an article at some point (the "blackout" defense may possibly garnet some future coverage). However, while it was very widely covered initially - coverage has gone down to local on not guilty plea - . The persisting level of coverage is not sufficient for me to assert RAPID, let alone establish continuing coverage.Icewhiz (talk) 11:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:CRIME is not the appropriate standard for judging notability here. WP:CRIME simply states that where a person is known only for the crime, then the article should be about the crime and not about the person. The real decider here should be WP:EVENT, particularly WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:LASTING. Searching for sources is complicated by the Salt Lake City shooting on the 9th of April, 2019, but I see that this was reported in the Washington Post which certainly counts as national-level coverage. WP:GEOSCOPE therefore seems sustainable. This was a recent event so it's too early to make a call on WP:LASTING, as WP:LASTING states that "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect. This does not, however, mean recent events with unproven lasting effect are automatically non-notable". As USER:Icewhiz states there are good reasons for believing it might have a lasting effect (the unusual defence used by the apparent perpetrator). The not-guilty plea was also reported by the Seattle Times. As for WP:NOTNEWS, the relevant part of this is point 2., which states that it should not be a routine event - but there is no suggestion that the events reported in this are routine, especially as they were reported in the British media. Coverage of the shootings from the tech angle (the shooter was an ex-Microsoft employee and claimed to have been playing X-box all day)can also be seen, as well as coverage from the angle of one of the victims being ex-military by Stars And Stripes. On balance I lean keep based on the above. FOARP (talk) 13:27, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Geekwire has significant local Seattle coverage and Stars and Stripes just republished the Seattle Times article, not as independent coverage. This is simply news, and yes WaPo routinely covers shootings around the US but that doesn't make them all notable.
 * Geekwire is not a "local" publication, neither is the WaPo, which absolutely is a national-level RS, and frankly I don't know why anyone would say otherwise. WP:NOTNEWS is there to stop inclusion of routine events but there are a number of reasons to believe this is not a routine event. FOARP (talk) 07:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:EVENT (particularly WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:LASTING as stated above). Gephart (talk) 15:53, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * (Standard disclaimer that this user is the article's author) Reywas92Talk 19:54, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No need for a disclaimer for the author, their vote also counts. It is absolutely non-standard to try to say otherwise. FOARP (talk) 07:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not the Seattle Times. Trillfendi (talk) 00:01, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * This story was also covered in the Washington Post, Star and Stripes, USA Today, The Daily Express (i.e., UK), Geekwire (i.e., from the tech angle). The shooting was also covered by AP and ABC's "Good Morning America". Really disagree with the idea that this was 1) routine and 2) only covered locally. FOARP (talk) 07:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Still falls into the routine category. What substantial coverage has been given to it since March? Trillfendi (talk) 15:30, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Like the guidelines says, it's a matter of weeks/months, not days, to see whether an event has WP:LASTING impact. Has it been months since this happened? No, it has barely been more than two weeks. PS - here's an AP story on this from last week. FOARP (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Very WP:ROUTINE news story limited to Seattle proper and the national crime roll for one day after. Please stop with 'the AP covered it because its notable' notices; the AP is a wire service picked up by nearly every newspaper, and network morning shows thrive on crime stories in their 7:30 a.m. A-block, no matter how local they are.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 16:02, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That would be AP, ABC, the Washington Post, Star And Stripes, USA Today, and GeekWire. Is it just one of those you want me to stop mentioning or all of them? FOARP (talk) 21:02, 20 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete, does not meet WP:EVENT, ie. it does not have "lasting major consequences or affects a major geographical scope, or receives significant non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time". Coolabahapple (talk) 02:31, 19 April 2019 (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.