Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Operation White Gun


 * 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. Recretion is possible if more turns up in independent reliable sources Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

Operation White Gun

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Subject does not meet WP:EVENT criteria. There is no depth of coverage: the only source of substance is an article in the LA Times. All other citations in the article are pages with brief mentions that link to the LAT as their source. A Google search showed me only one other (brief) mention of the subject from May. No duration of coverage and no diversity of sources. Editors with some knowledge of the topic may agree that, beyond subtext, there is no evidence that the subject is anything except a routine event. Aspects of WP:RECENT also apply. hɑzʎ ɗɑƞ 22:20, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * To clarify, the Google search I refer to concerns a Google news search for original information, not a general search which reveals sites using the LAT article as a source. hɑzʎ ɗɑƞ 22:33, 30 January 2012 (UTC)


 * article creator : merge I would support a mergeto the gunwalking scandal article, as was done with the fast and furious, while allowing for recreation if future coverage increases. Gaijin42 (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * There is no information I've seen that says this operation involved gunwalking, which makes it different from the operations in that article. It was more of a typical sting where an unknown number of guns (1? 50?) may have been lost. I'm not sure it belongs there at all, but certainly no more than a couple of sentences saying that it was looked at in the course of a congressional investigation. hɑzʎ ɗɑƞ 16:34, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Not notable; A news search produces only a single Wikipedia-compliant reliable source, and that source asserts more speculation than fact at this time. If a significant story should develop around this subject, then it could be mentioned in an existing, related article.  If it should then become notable enough to meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, an article can be created for it. Xenophrenic (talk) 03:06, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Xenophrenic. We don't need an article for each newspaper story. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:54, 7 February 2012 (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.