Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Thomas Roberts


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. (non-admin closure)  ❯❯❯  Raydann  (Talk)   04:03, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

Murder of Thomas Roberts

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This fails WP:GNG. Horrible as it is, was, for the victim and for those who loved them, WP:NOTNEWS applies. The article has been substantially padded out with material about the murderer, and suffered from WP:CITEKILL 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:36, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and England.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:05, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your review. Politely, I disagree that this article fails WP:GNG. The sources are reliable, with significant coverage at the time, and ongoing (at present, this murder has been heard in the House of Commons, discussed by a number of politicians and an inquest remains ongoing, on the matter of how the suspect, who had killed two people previously, was able to enter the UK and kill again). If I can be of more assistance to answer specific questions, please do not hesitate to reply. InilanNahklia (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment I believe we should interpret this as expressing the opinion to keep the article. 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 08:43, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep. Meets WP:SUSTAINED: this source about an aspect of the subject is from a year and a half after the event: Folly Mox (talk) 18:34, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - Arguably, sufficient coverage in sources to satisfy WP:GNG and continued coverage, noted above, appears to negate WP:Not News. --Ykraps (talk) 10:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Weak keep I participate by providing input alongside those who advocate for retaining the article.-- Jasulan .T  TT me 14:31, 8 October 2023 (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.