Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Richard O'Brien


 * 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. The problem with this debate is even those proposing to merge to UK deaths in custody are concerned about the appropriateness of a merge. I think the best thing to do is to delete for the moment, then userfy the article when somebody is prepared to do a suitable merge. (PS: On seeing this, I raced to the news sites thinking the more famous Richard O'Brien had died.) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  14:29, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Death of Richard O'Brien

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete: as non-notable incident. If we are going to include the deaths of everyone in police custody around the world, then we need to change our priorities. This is not inherently notable; it is ethnic coatracking. Quis separabit? 13:50, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:37, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Received significant, in-depth coverage in multiple, independent, reliable sources for many years. Had lasting significance with police forced to pay sizeable compensation. Nom's rationale is dishonest and incendiary. AusLondonder (talk) 02:45, 29 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Rather than criticism of Rms125a you should be concentrating on the article. Which as I see it fails WP:EVENTCRITERIA. Specifically the three sources given are not from the time of the incident, one is a trivial mention in reference to other cases. and the other two are about a later court ruling (a WP:SINGLEEVENT issue). Additionally the sources are all published by the same newspaper, so there’s no multiple sources or widespread coverage. Before and after the court ruling there is nothing, so I see no lasting significance. A Guy into Books (talk) 09:35, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * When the nom chooses to make comments suggesting "ethnic coatracking" then they should expect criticism. AusLondonder (talk) 14:47, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You have a point there, although I'm not sure if 'dishonest and incendiary' or references to 'ethnic coatracking' should be used, I suppose this is just a contentious issue. A Guy into Books (talk) 15:31, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting so that further discussion can hopefully concentrate on questions of notability rather than (perceived or otherwise) personal agendas, etc.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  11:47, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - seems like a routine case of police misconduct and subsequent judicial review (including a compensation)., From the article it appears that there was no lasting impact. 81.204.120.137 (talk) 15:00, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete clear violation of the "not news" rules of Wikipedia. If people can find reliable source material that supports such, there might be room to mention this incident in a larger article on police actions and restricted breathing deaths, but it is not notable enough for a stand alone article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:16, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge into a general article on deaths in police custody. bd2412  T 17:40, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * which article is that? A Guy into Books (talk) 19:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * UK deaths in custody or Death in custody. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Seems a reasonable idea. I don't think this article merits its own article, but as as section of a larger article, it would at least still be included. A Guy into Books (talk) 07:15, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:30, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect and selective merge to UK deaths in custody, seems appropriate because case got substantive news coverage and is mentioned in books, gBooks search . However,  If anyone wants to take a closer look and make a substantive case for keeping, ping me and I'll revisit. Note that page describes him as an Irish nation, and - I'm stereotyping - his name is O'Brian; neverthelessthis gBooks hit  in a book called Race, Crime and Resistance, by By Tina G Patel & David Tyrer, seems to assert that he was not white and that this was race-related. E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:33, 15 September 2017 (UTC) Striking that because while my comment was accurate, I went to a news archive and checked.  That book looks reputable, but the authors mistook.  O'Brien was of Irish ethnicity, but his case is often discussed in a group or series of police custody deaths that happened soon after one another and that involved the death of The Guardian: "The three, two blacks and an Irishman, died after they were forcibly restrained.".  .  After scaning the coverage, I continue to think redirect.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:42, 15 September 2017 (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.