Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clovis library shooting


 * 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.  Sandstein  07:26, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Clovis library shooting

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Second nomination: the first nomination as WP:NOTNEWS failed (with a non-admin closure) becayse people seem not to understand that Wikipedia is not a news feed. A thoroughly unremarkable crime, and I can't see anything that indicates any degree of lasting interest in it. TheLongTone (talk) 15:46, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 16:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 16:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Mexico-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 16:07, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - the first AfD for this article was Articles for deletion/2017 Clovis library shooting. ansh 666 20:38, 24 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - at the time of the first AfD being submitted, it was legitimate, but the coverage this received is certainly sufficient - multiple high quality sources at a national level. The key consideration is WP:EVENTCRIT, point 1: the article is not likely to have "enduring historical significance" and quite possibly lacks "significant lasting effect" (though I would say it does meet WP:GNG). However, point 2 is met - significant USA-wide coverage.


 * With this clashing set-up, the actual relevant bit is in WP:GEOSCOPE "Coverage of an event nationally or internationally may make notability more likely, but such coverage should not be the sole basis for creating an article.". So now we end up in the judgement call - does a mass-shooting, though small in that category, have a lasting impact (on a sufficient geographical scope) to satisfy both grounds sufficiently?


 * WP:PERSISTENCE is satisfied, with articles on the progression of his trial, diagnosis and treatment, e.g. [| Evaluation], [| Treatment Refused]. It is also referred to as the reference point in other local gun-related/threat-related articles, which indicates some degree of lasting psyche impact if linking current events to that actually has any relevance.


 * Therefore, I feel that coverage diversity and breadth is satisfied, and duration is sufficiently satisfied (albeit primarily with sources not yet added to the article) to encourage a keep. Nosebagbear (talk) 09:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, I suspect by SNOW. International news item when it broke. A cursory looks at coverage shows it still is a fairly high profile news item (during the trial) which coverage by the news wires (e.g. AP). Definitely meets NCRIME / SIGCOV.Icewhiz (talk) 13:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Coverage of trials is routine. It is no indicator of real ongoing interest.TheLongTone (talk) 13:32, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If you nominated this in 2019 or 2020 - you might have a point if there were no WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE (for a sufficient period of time). As it is - there is continuous coverage from August 2017 to April 2018 - every month you have an item, and some of it is national or international - placing us in a WP:RAPIDish situation of assessing WP:BALL of future coverage. There no reason to think this won't be notable going forward - it was quite a notorious incident - mass shootings by teenagers against un-invovled random victims often are notable - regardless of the bodycount.Icewhiz (talk) 13:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Note that article was KEPT at Articles for deletion/2017 Clovis library shooting in August 2017.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NCRIME, WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * commentIt was kept because of a lot of 'votes' from people who do not understand WP:NOTNEWS.TheLongTone (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * in response, I looked at the comments in the 2017 AfD; and found a familiar mix of policy-based arguments with arguments by editors who appear to lack familiarity with AfD. Noting that Longtone was Nom on both AfDs.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:06, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * According to Public Radio station KUNM, although the Associated Press usually refrains from using the names of juvenile defendants, it has chosen to publish Nathaniel Jouett's name "because of the seriousness of the crime and because authorities are seeking adult sanctions."E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:19, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - coverage continues even as of 11 days ago. A self-evident case of WP:GNG.  Note the nominator is the same for both the previously failed AfD and this AfD. XavierItzm (talk) 16:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)


 * As stated,. there is routine current coverage of this non-event because of the trial. this is NOT significant ongoing coverage; I suggest that all thos who want to keep this read the relevant guidelines. I fully intend to nominate this a third time if this nom fails.TheLongTone (talk) 10:45, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The "routine" coverage claim is discussed in WP:NOTNEWS. This claim for deletion is based on a misreading of policy. The policy is aimed against entertainment news. Specifically, WP:NOTNEWS reads "routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia." This case on the contrary is a notable crime.  Besides, this is clearly not "routine news reporting" on "announcements, sports, or celebrities". This is routine news reporting a major crime and therefore WP:NOTNEWS does not apply. I can only recommend re-reading the WP:NOTNEWS policy. Finally, the unsound arguments in favor of NOTNEWS are trumped by WP:NCRIME, which reads «Articles about criminal acts, particularly those that fall within the category of "breaking news", are frequently the subject of deletion discussions. As with other events, media coverage can confer notability on a high-profile criminal act», so keeping this article ought to be adjudicated by default, as clearly the coverage has been extensive and continues to date.XavierItzm (talk) 13:53, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep -Though mass shootings are becoming common in the USA of today, it is yet notable.  C. W. Gilmore (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:EVENTCRIT, all heinous crimes have local coverage of the proceedings of criminal trials about them and that type of coverage (such as on a New Mexico TV station) is WP:MILL and doesn't automatically mean that GNG is met. Beyond that, we have national coverage in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, and nothing else.  All murders are tragic, but not all are notable. power~enwiki ( π ,  ν ) 18:07, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Except that, at the moment, a wave of activism that is bringing school shootings into the headlines in a manner that is anything but run-of-the-mill. U.S. News & World Report, 20 April 2018: "At New Mexico State Capitol, Students Plead for Gun Safety", "New Mexico was shaken by a December shooting at Aztec High School that killed two students. An August 2017 shooting at a public library in Clovis left two dead and four wounded."]  Passes WP:NCRIME.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:07, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm leaning more towards keep as it appears to exceed WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRIT. However, how does the above USN&WR article assist?  There is just a brief mention of the crime in that article, no depth of coverage regarding the abhorrent event at all.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 21:52, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It is part of a series of incidents that have driven a nationwide political clamor for reform this spring, and a nationwide concern about the potential for copycat shootings by teens. (note that  "According to the report, Nathaniel Jouett admitted to police that he was the shooter inside the library, and said he took the guns from his dad’s safe.  He went on to say that he “had planned the attack for a while and wanted to shoot the school up and then kill himself,” ....  he “ended up at the library because he was angry and was either going to kill himself, or a bunch of people.”  It has returned  to the news cycle in improbable ways:  Mexico student arrested in high school shooting threat; photo caption led to calls to Burlington police], that's Burlington, North Carolina where, "police said it received multiple calls from citizens Sunday regarding the post the teen made, according to a police news release. The concern that these callers had was that one of the captions mentioned a "CHS" which they believed was referring to Cummings High School in Burlington."  But a closer look Snapchat Threat Shuts Down High School in Missouri reveals a broader concern about the potential copycat impact, an impact that is cumulative as schools and communities nationwide (my 4-year-old's pre-K now has live-shooter drills) react to the  "Numerous copycat threats (that) have also popped up around the nation"''. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:54, 2 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep it has been demonstrated that this has received both national and ongoing coverage. Therefore WP:NOTNEWS is inapplicable, and WP:EVENTCRITERIA is met.  This is a notable event for which a reader is likely to seek encyclopedic information.  The encyclopedia is thereby not improved by the removal of this entry.   78.26  (spin me / revolutions) 21:25, 3 May 2018 (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.