Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Norway 2011 Attack Victims


 * 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. v/r - TP 19:28, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Norway 2011 Attack Victims

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Per NOT; for the same reasons we don't list victims of disasters and attacks, we don't need a list like this. OhNo itsJamie Talk 21:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. RichardOSmith (talk) 22:21, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - 100% agreeable. Does not follow WP:MOS in any case, little value.Jasper Deng (talk) 22:43, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTMEMORIAL. DES (talk) 01:20, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. Nothing prevents from creating articles about individual victims or groups of victims, if they are sufficiently covered in press per WP:Notability. Biophys (talk) 04:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Subject, of course, to the considerations at WP:BIO1E and WP:VICTIM. RichardOSmith (talk) 10:00, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as per WP:NOTMEMORIAL Miguel AG (talk) 06:22, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete for the obvious reasons. This is beginning to look like a WP:SNOW candidate. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  17:40, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. These are other places where to post this kind of lists. Chiton magnificus (talk) 17:54, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Retain. It's fundamentally the same article as Casualties of the September 11 attacks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gaijin Ninja (talk • contribs)
 * It's nothing like that at all. This article is simply a list of non-notable victims. WWGB (talk) 02:31, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Indeed; the articles are quite different, and anyway it is an irrelevance - see WP:OTHERSTUFF. RichardOSmith (talk) 09:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Retain. Like 9/11, this is a highly visible and popular topic, many references. It is very valuable (keep or merge). Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 23:22, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * See Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, especially WP:OTHERSTUFF ("Like 9/11"), WP:POPULARPAGE ("this is a highly visible and popular topic"), WP:PLENTY ("many references") and WP:VALINFO ("It is very valuable"). RichardOSmith (talk) 09:26, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment There is still an article about the attack. This is simply a list of victims. We don't have a list of victims for the 9/11 attacks either. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 17:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment We do and lots more as well.
 * Casualties of the September 11 attacks.
 * Memorials and services for the September 11 attacks.
 * Rumors about the September 11 attacks.
 * Health effects arising from the September 11 attacks.
 * Motives for the September 11 attacks.
 * Planning of the September 11 attacks
 * Even List of audiovisual entertainment affected by the September 11 attacks.
 * This is obviously to Norway what that was to America. i.e. MASSIVE. Group of casualties covered by press around the world of massacre covered by press around the world continuously for days and going into weeks. Victims from all over Norway, the equivalent of just about every state. Valid references available. WP:CHANCE. Has potential. (I am neither Norwegian nor American) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.40.100.111 (talk • contribs)
 * Retain. I agree with last two retains. I feel this detail gives a deeper view of the attack, he killed fellow Norwegians from all parts of Norway.--Dmresearch (talk) 02:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clear violation of WP:NOTMEMORIAL, also mindful of Victim lists. WWGB (talk) 02:28, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Also, I'm sure that there are other websites which list the names of those killed in the attacks, and a reliable one could be placed as an external link on the 2011 Norway attacks article. --Sgt. R.K. Blue (talk) 06:30, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Retain. Like 9/11. Two countries two different standards?? AugustinMa (talk) 07:19, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment We don't have a list of victims for the 9/11 attacks either. OhNo itsJamie Talk 17:12, 31 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Retain. No hard reason to delete, and there are plenty of victim pages for other events on Wikipedia. This was pretty significant in Norway, and so should be kept, albeit cleaned up a bit. 99.227.141.18 (talk) 07:40, 31 July 2011 (UTC) — 99.227.141.18 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. WWGB (talk) 13:04, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: WP:NOTMEMORIAL says it all. I still remember when we were swatting articles about 9/11 victims regularly. Guideline &amp; Policy Wonk (talk) 23:14, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 01:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - It does not look like a "memorial" and seems not to be created as a "memorial" (what sometimes happens but seems not to be the case here). It gives just useful factual information about the victims. IQinn (talk) 01:45, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete : per WP:NOTMEMORIAL--Wikireader41 (talk) 01:49, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator and WP:NOTMEMORIAL.V7-sport (talk) 03:02, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * deletei changed my mind Pass a Method   talk  09:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete Very inappropriate - per the above WP:NOTMEMORIAL, but also WP:NOTDIR, and in consideration of this excessive information; knowing their dates of birth, and the names of these non-public people, does not help encyclopaedic understanding at all. An encyclopaedic summary of the victims (number, age, sex, origin) can easily be appropriately incorporated into the article about the event. This article should be deleted, ASAP.  Chzz  ► 10:17, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge This event has seen a lot continuous media coverage all over the world. The list better shows the differences between the victims of the bombing and the victims of the shooting.  The list shows the wide range of places from all over Norway the victims were and can better explain why it is called a national tragedy in Norway.  It gives a hint of the (lack of) immigrant background of the victims based on their names.  And with more information that is possible to add.  With even more information, for example if they died from gun shots or drowning, etc, it is possible to gain more (morbid) information for those interested.  Also, several other mass murder articles list their victims by name and age.  To list a few: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laniala (talk • contribs)


 * Strong delete clear violation of WP:NOT, and serves no encyclopaedic purpose Ohconfucius  ¡digame! 09:25, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Regrettable, but it's been Wikipedia's long-standing policy that memorial pages of this kind aren't encyclopedic. Prioryman (talk) 19:53, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as Wikipedia is not a memorial site. On Wikipedia we're not supposed to note the victims (only notable ones, if any), and the numbers (e.g. how many of the victims were in this age or male/female) aren't relevant. I concur with the nominator. Hey  Mid  (contribs) 20:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Wikipedia is not a directory. Wikipedia is not a memorial. WP:SNOW --Pstanton (talk) 05:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge (first choice) or keep (second choice). The practice on Wikipedia (part of which is shown by the links provided by Laniala) seems to be that we do list victims of mass murders.  My preference would be to do so in the article on the event itself (which seems to be the more common practice), but that article is already a bit long.  We do have some separate articles, such as List of Charles Whitman's victims (listing the victims of the 1966 U. of Texas "tower shootings") and List of victims of the Rock Springs massacre (about an 1885 event I had never heard of before.)  I don't think this is an "other stuff exists" argument because it it involves exactly the same type of information found in many other articles on Wikipedia.  To the contrary, it shows what the policy/guideline really is (since policies and guidelines on Wikipedia are "descriptive, not prescriptive."  And WP:NOTMEMORIAL does not even mention victims of notable events; it is really just an elaboration on the notability guidelines, to tell people not to create an article on their otherwise non-notable relative or friend.  Neutron (talk) 17:40, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm afraid both precedence and guidelines are pretty unambiguous on this. It would be a different thing if it was rewritten in prose form. Lampman (talk) 18:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unambiguous case of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Analysis of the victims, by age for example, can be in the 2011 Norway attacks article. &mdash; RHaworth 09:08, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete clear case of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Arsenikk (talk)  11:02, 4 August 2011 (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.