Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ivaylo Ivanov (criminal)


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 06:11, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Ivaylo Ivanov (criminal)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:PERP. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 01:54, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with nominator: it's kind of unusual, but it didn't get a ton of coverage apart from the normal run of the mill news cycle. SportingFlyer (talk) 03:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bulgaria-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 03:56, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Continuing coverage through 2015-6 in criminology literature - e.g. - in addition to news coverage in 2008-2010.Icewhiz (talk) 08:06, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note - Editors please read these book sources. They are brief blurbs without any indepth analysis. Heck, the first one looks like exact text from this article or vice versa.


 * Delete - This is exactly what WP:NOTNEWS was meant for. There certainly has not been significant impact from this relatively small-time criminal and misrepresenting sources as done above will not make the subject any more notable. "Continuing coverage" are actually routine follow-ups after lapses in any material whatsoever.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 14:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * au contraire, WP:NOTNEWS applies to " routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities".E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And you genuinely believe the news doesn't routinely report on crimes? Sad.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:18, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:SIGCOV. No fewer than 7 separate stories about Ivanov appeared in the New York Times over the course of three years,  several are INDEPTH stories. Similar in other New York area newspapers, srory also covered in national  and international press including Bulgaria, Canada and Israel.  It is likely that Nom's WP:BEFORE searches were hampered by the fact that the story is a decade old and there are several other people named Ivaylo Ivanov  (including a footballer, a pastor, a corporate executive) who get their names into English-language media regularly, and perhaps hampered further by lack of access to a news archive (many of which are paywalled).  However, using keywords in  news archive search produces dozens of articles, (UPI Police find weapons in N.Y. apartment;    "New York police evacuated several residential buildings after finding pipe bombs and a collection of guns in an apartment Sunday. Ivaylo Ivanov, 31, arrived at Long Island College Hospital shortly after midnight Sunday with a gunshot wound to the hand police later said was self-inflicted accidentally...")  and the case is revisited in a number of academic books on hate crime, usually discussed as a type in a group with other cases a scholar is describing as similar in some specific way.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - I agree that this doesn't meet WP:PERP. Spray painting graffiti and making bombs are sadly routine. There were a few articles that came out during the events and ensuing trial, the NY Times article being the most notable publication, but it was routine coverage that you'd find in any copy of the Daily News. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  20:43, 5 March 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.