Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gun violence


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-07 06:13Z 

Gun violence

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

*Delete. Has POV issues. Yaf 05:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) Delete as it presents a POV that guns are only associated with violence, instead of with self-defense, sport, and other legal uses.  Yaf 05:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)  Keep. Many of the POV issues have been addressed, and the article has grown from a dictionary definition to the beginnings of a real article. Yaf 03:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, this one-line article may be a pitiful stub right now, since the former article was rightly moved to Gun violence in the United States, but gun violence is a very real and highly debated issue, and this has potential for expansion to incorporate a worldwide view on the subject. And honestly, I don't see any POV issues in the single sentence that currently makes up this article: "Gun violence is deadly force through the use of firearms." Krimpet 05:44, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, a very important subject, a pity that this article is so short. It is not POV to say there exists violence related to firearms. 96T 08:46, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand.  Intinn Talk! 09:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - notable and POV issues are not a reason for deletion. Koweja 15:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Now that some stuff has been added, I'll change to a weak keep. Delete - An article with no content is useless. This one shouldn't even qualify for a stub.  It's more of a dictionary entry.  The old article was moved because it was U.S.-centric.  Any new content in this article is likely to follow the same path I think.  (I don't think that the title of the article pushes a POV.  Violence does sometimes involve guns.  That's just a fact.  Vehicular homicide doesn't imply cars are only murder weapons, does it?)  —Thernlund (Talk 03:53, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Issues resolved. Article has meaning and usefulness now. Delete - per Thernlund, the article is a definition and contains no useful information otherwise.  Perhaps until the article has been rewritten with actual content redirect to Gun violence in the United States. - (Ninsaneja 18:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC))
 * Delete unless expanded to at least a referenced stub While I doubt anyone will dispute that Gun Violence isn't a significant topic of discussion, this article isn't a discussion on the topic. It's not even a stub and it doesn't even have any references.  It's just an unreferenced single sentence.  Delete for now unless the article is expanded to at least a minimal level of stub-like info, and has at least some minimal references to show that it's not original research.  Of course, that wouldn't preclude a good article on the topic being written down the road. Dugwiki 20:54, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I expanded it to a couple sentences with references, to describe the scope of the topic and what it encompasses. Krimpet 03:43, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. If there is Gun_violence_in_the_United_States then this can't be controverial. David Spart 21:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Has POV issues, lacks sources, etc.--Mike Searson 23:33, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Yafs comments above. --Spoisp
 * Delete. Dicdef and redundant to gun violence in the United States. Dragomiloff 18:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Gun violence is a basic and highly notable topic, with no shortage of reliable sources (UK Home Office, U.S. Department of Justice, Canada, Australia etc.) Right now the page serves more as a disambiguation page, until time that more substance is added. --Aude (talk) 19:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Note This article has been listed at WikiProject_Firearms. --Aude (talk) 19:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * And at WikiProject_Firearms. Yaf 04:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep If more info is added, it can be a pretty good article. Captain panda   In   vino   veritas  22:26, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has grown from to the better since the nomination and has the potential to be a interesting artcle. Rettetast 21:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per nom withdraw. - ElbridgeGerry t c block 12:23, 6 March 2007 (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.