Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of United States death row inmates


 * 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. The keep arguments noted that because of the publicity of death penalty trials and appeals in the United States, recipients of the death penalty are likely to be individually notable by standard criteria including biographic coverage. While WP:BLP can override a construction tag, any WP:BLP issues involved appear debatable and potentially decidable either way. This issue can be revisited and the article renominated for AfD if the arguments that members of list are individually notable in their own right turn out, based on experience, to be incorrect. Shirahadasha (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

List of United States death row inmates

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Wikipedia isn't really the appropriate place to maintain dynamic lists Bagheera (talk) 18:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment That's really not a reason for deletion. Wikipedia has many, many dynamic lists of varying usefulness. However, this list may or may not be considered to be indiscriminate information. I abstain for now pending a better deletion argument. LaMenta3 (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: I agree there are a number of various dynamic lists, and I should have been more specific. The links on the list as created connect to dab pages that don't include articles on the individual inmates (at least that I saw).  I've got several concerns here, amongst them the assumption that an inmate is notable specifically because they are on death row, and the relevance in an encyclopedia of a list of convicted felons. Cheers. Bagheera (talk) 19:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * With regard to this list, I'm inclined to agree. I seem to recall precedent that people on death row cannot be considered notable simply based upon being on death row. I don't have discussions to back that up; perhaps someone else has a slightly better memory than I do. As there are so many people on death row in the U.S., and only a handful of them meet notability guidelines (meaning they are notable for something else other than being on death row--whether that notability is related to why they're on death row or to something else doesn't really matter), I think that the information would be better served, perhaps, by a category. That would allow the notable death row inmates to be "collected" in a central place and would be more reasonable given that the list doesn't provide any more information than a category would. What do you think? LaMenta3 (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * A category of "notable people on death row" might not be bad, as Pharmboy points out below. Bagheera (talk) 23:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete or possibly recreate In spite of a well meaning but misplaced nom. This one isn't easy.  I understand the desire to have a list of the people, but the fact remains that the majority of them are not notable in their own right.  Being sentenced to death (unfortunately) isn't enough to establish notability, by my interpretation.  I can see lots of room for discussing the current state of executions (they are currently Stayed here in North Carolina and elsewhere, for instance) but just a list of people who are sentenced to receive the death penalty falls short in context and notability.  Deleting this article would not stop anyone from creating an article on anyone who is shown to be notable and was given the death sentence, nor finding a way to create an article that lists "notable persons who have served time on death row".  I don't think this is necessarily an indescriminate list (perhaps close, though), and I am not afraid of the dynamic nature of the list.  I think a list of ALL people who had ever served time on death row might pass the test, assuming you had the disposition for each instance, and it went back as far as records could possible go.  It could list the effects of the Supreme Court decisions over the years (ie: who was stayed permanantly, who was released, who go the chain/needle/hanging).  As this list is NOW, and as it is titled, I can't see how it can pass via the policies. Pharmboy (talk) 22:41, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep and continue to construct: I started working on this page today, and I used the Underconstruction tag to let others know that it is under construction. This tag specifically states that the article is not to be tagged for deletion UNLESS it has not been edited in several days . Being that this may take a long time, I have set a goal of adding one state each day I get time to work on the page (unless others help, which I would appreciate). I am also considering whether or not to make the list a chart that would list other facts pertaining to each individual, such as details of their crime, the dates they were sentenced and placed on death row, etc. And most importantly, whenever any exist, I am planning on providing links to any articles about the inmates themselves or are otherwise mentioned in.Hellno2 (talk) 00:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but use the intro to properly frame and limit the list to notable inmates, either because of their non-criminal notability, the notability of their crime, or the notability of their appellate activity. There is no purpose in a "complete" list, and no harm in having a dynamic list with a proper scope. --Dhartung | Talk 06:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I actually disagree with Pharmboy above and can explain. Death row inmates are extremely likely to satisfy the notability guideline, in terms of independent news coverage.  Media outlets everywhere in the country cover homicide trials, especially those leading to death sentences.  As a consequence, the vast majority of these inmates will have received news coverage from multiple, reliable sources even before sentencing, and because of the various anti-death penalty groups, there are even more resources to help in maintaining this list of inmates actually on death row.  Also, it's worth noting that the list is not that dynamic.  In the 30 years since the death penalty was reestablished in the United States, only 30 executions have occurred per year (though sentences are a bit higher.)  The number of death sentences in 2007 was only 110.  Thus, once complete, the list would only need editing about twice a week (140 times a year) to be absolutely 100 percent accurate.  That's not a huge burden, and I believe it would be easy to find reliable sources.  If motivated editors are working on this, I see no reason not to give it a chance. --JayHenry (t) 22:07, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * comment I understand what you are saying, but you are opening a can of worms as every single person listed must be individually sourced. I think if you read the bottom of my reply, I was stating that I felt it would be notable without proving individual notability if you included everyone who has ever been on death row, instead of making the list "current", which may jive with what you are saying.  While only a few sentences may be passed down every year, 3500 people  are on death row NOW, and each would have to be sourced.  That is a buttload of sources.  Expanding to everyone that has ever been on death row (I don't know, guessing 7000 maybe) wouldn't need to be individually sourced and may be a better article anyway AND I think it would pass policy more easily. Pharmboy (talk) 00:35, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * One model that this could possibly follow is the superbly done List of gay%2C lesbian or bisexual people which is individually sourced. It's broken out over many different subpages, and many of these subpages have been classified as Featured Lists.  It's larger than this list would be if it were completed.  It would take a lot of time for this list to get there, but in my opinion it would be a worthwhile attempt.  Possibly it will totally fail, but if it succeeds it'd be a really amazing and encyclopedic resource.  The List of gay, lesbian and bisexual people never would have become so impressive and useful were it not given time to be developed. --JayHenry (t) 23:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep As JayHenry says, there are plenty of sources for each. You can probably assume that all death-row inmates would meet WP:N. Most death-row murderers would pass the biggest notability hurdle for convicts -- the WP:BLP1E standard at WP:BIO -- because there is generally enough written about the person's entire life by the time they get convicted, and they've generally done more than one newsworthy thing by the time they're accused of capital-offense murder (so the article is unlikely to be about one event). A list can give additional information to help readers navigate to the articles or at least identify murderers whose names they might have forgotten (something a category can't do). Noroton (talk) 22:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: As I mentioned earlier, I am still trying to decide the best format for this page. Meanwhile, I am working simply on building the list, state by state. Ultimately, it'll probably be some kind of chart, listing in columns information on the crimes each of these individuals committed that led to their death sentences, and the date each one was placed on death row. There could be other columns, too. If you Google the name of any of these individuals, you will likely get at least several hits, probably many more, given the amount of media coverge a capital murder case receives. That alone is usually enough in itself to establish notability. Since I have just started this undertaking, I have not determined where there are any Wikipedia articles on any of these individuals or cases pertaining to them, but I'm sure I will find out as I do more research. Any help others can provide me with building this page I will appreciate.Hellno2 (talk) 00:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment As a side note, the article shouldn't have been nominated to start with, now that I see you did put up an 'under construction' tag in a proper fashion. That should have prevented this AFD, and nominator might want to read the policy on AFDs when tagged as such, for future reference.  While I am sure the nom was in good faith, he should have waited a week and gave it time to develop.  In my opinion, it would be entirely proper if he withdrew the nomination, in good faith, and we instead move the conversation over to the article's talk page, and see if we can find some direction for the article that would make a future AFD moot.  Pharmboy (talk) 01:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. When I started out this article, I listed just the DR inmates from one state - Alabama. This was supposed to be not its final form, but just a start. From that point on, I was hoping that if others became aware of this article's existence, they would not only assist in its construction, but give input to its format and scope.Hellno2 (talk) 23:25, 16 January 2008 (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.