Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FBI raid of Michael Cohen's Office


 * 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 and redirect to Michael Cohen (lawyer). Spartaz Humbug! 16:00, 18 April 2018 (UTC)

FBI raid of Michael Cohen's Office

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

per WP:FART (and, more seriously, WP:NOTNEWS). This is a news story, and clearly not notable outside the context of whatever larger story it is relevant to. I'm not sure it's relevant to an article on "Russia-Trump" stuff or Stormy Daniels stuff. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 03:39, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 09:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Everything related to Trump seems to be horrible, but not all of it is noteworthy. This belongs in the fart category (hah). Clarityfiend (talk) 07:22, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Coverage is widespread and clearly meets WP:N. Nothing within WP:NOTNEWS forbids creation of articles that clearly meet WP:N about an event.Casprings (talk) 11:08, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * For example, routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia. - "Trump associate investigated" falls into that categorization at this point. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 14:11, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * If/when it's clear *why* the raid happened, I'm fine with a merge/redirect. I don't see that yet, and definitely don't see how it's related to Russia (as the article navbox implies). power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 14:13, 10 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - This is a small event within a few notable events; for that reason, I cannot pinpoint a single merge target. Wikipedia is not a newspaper and it was rather foolish to create such an article before any actual impact (the thing that makes recent events notable, historically) or at least more context. Sadly, however, as long as recentism bias exists, time will be wasted on discussions like this.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 12:04, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep -- We not only have a huge amount of coverage, but there's a growing body of commentary explaining why this raid is incredibly important. It's rare on WP for us not only to have RS but to have RS explicitly stating that the subject is notable.  Just for instance, see Volokh Conspiracy and Popehat.  Sure, these are blogs, but as WP:BLOGS says, "Self-published expert sources may be considered reliable when produced by an established expert on the subject matter, whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications."  These are reliable sources telling us that this raid is hugely important.  Thus it certainly meets the GNG. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 14:07, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: Surely in the coming days or weeks we'll find a better place to incorporate this content, and leave this as a redirect, unless somehow this single event becomes more individually significant.--Milowent • hasspoken  14:38, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - The event has already been added to a section in the Michael Cohen article. I see no need (yet) for the event to have its own page. --kewlgrapes (talk) 15:53, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Somehow it didn't occur to me to redirect to Michael Cohen (lawyer). That seems the best option here. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 15:55, 10 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Michael Cohen (lawyer). Maybe there will be more significant coverage in the future, but we are not a crystal ball. Natureium (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per Natureium. This has happened, but on its own it does not have sufficient significance to warrant its own article. Inserting the appropriate content in the article is what is usually done with such material. I don't think there is grounds for a redirect since it would be too obscure, i.e. falls per WP:R reason no. 8 198.84.253.202 (talk) 00:34, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not news. Anything worth covering can be included in the artcile on Cohen.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:25, 18 April 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.