Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reactions to the death of Prince


 * 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 procedural close. Discussion has been bundled here. (non-admin closure)  Erpert  blah, blah, blah... 21:38, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Reactions to the death of Prince

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is WP:TOOSOON. Wikipedia is not a memorial or a place for a collection of quotes (wikiquote is for that) (WP:QUOTEFARM). It is also WP:NOTNEWS, specifically "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion."

We have no indication that (1) immediate reactions have lasting notability and (2) any notable actions or comments cannot be included on Prince (musician). General reactions such as lighting buildings purple or turning websites purple can be summarized on the BLP's page. Specific extremely notable quotes that have enduring notability can also be included there. Should there be enough enduring notable reactions (e.g. memorial scholarships, museums, stamps, holidays, events, etc.), this article would be appropriate. Until then, it is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Leave the quotes and reactions for Wikiquote and Wikinews for now.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 05:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong delete Agree with everything Evergreen Fir noted and will add my own comment: the existence of the article is unbelievably ridiculous and silly. Creator should be trouted. --  WV ● ✉ ✓  05:32, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Just a case of hysteria. Don't trout anyone, though. InedibleHulk (talk) 14:05, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. It is indeed far too soon for such an article when we don't know how much impact his death will have yet. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:40, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Definitely delete While the consensus has been  to keep such pages; the precedence has always been set over major international issues and the reactions are official responses from heads of state and diplomats.  The death of Prince is not especially notable; it warrants no more than a mention on the Prince page; and the quotations here are largely from people with no official standing or noteworthiness in this context.  Definitely delete.  Mtaylor848 (talk) 16:21, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per WP:NOTMEMORIAL.  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 17:29, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unless his autopsy is ruled suspicious it's inappropriate at this time. Zerbey (talk) 17:48, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge. I think some of the contatn is worth preserving in a merge to the parent article. Softlavender (talk) 18:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This article was copied wholesale to several hours after this nomination was opened.  Rebb  ing  18:49, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the main article. This is routine coverage of an event best described in the biography.  These "reactions to" articles are getting out of hand, and my reaction to them is to say they should generally be moved to Wikiquote or Wikinews. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:10, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Agree, Wikiquote  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 19:39, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Newsworthy, a major cultural icon with reactions from major world leaders and figures. Are you seriously considering deleting it? Wow. -- Camilo S&aacute;nchez Talk to me 19:30, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, because it says nothing that can't be/isn't already in the article on Prince. Well, and, there are things like Wikipedia is not a memorial but is an encyclopedia.  Inconvenient, I know, but... -- WV ● ✉ ✓  19:33, 22 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Like all others its more of a WP:NOTNEWS topic and is, more or less, an online memorial.  A dog 104  Talk to me 20:11, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete It's WP:Coatrack, and vis-à-vis Death of David Bowie there simply isn't an array of homages from notables outside of pop culture, President Obama's statement aside. kencf0618 (talk) 21:53, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete No need for a list of statements put on Twitter, this can all be summed up as it is in a sentence in the death section, and maybe a snippet from someone who knew him very well, such as his idol Stevie Wonder. In five or ten years, people will look to see how Prince died, they will not look for what Beyonce or Spike Lee wrote on the Internet &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 22:13, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge No need for stand alone article. Sander.v.Ginkel (Talk) 22:25, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * SNOW Delete as I see nothing convincingly better for the article's future as its own article. SwisterTwister   talk  23:17, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Wikipedia doesn't need a page of Tweets about the death of Prince. 2601:483:101:9BDD:6882:19B3:F900:F6D8 (talk) 22:23, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Too early to tell if this particular event deserves its own article. --Sunshineisles2 (talk) 00:08, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete The article should be remade as Death of Prince anyways if it is going to be here on wikipedia. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 00:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete These "reactions to" articles are the worst, most unencyclopedic cruft we have. "Someone dies, everyone is sad." This is of no benefit whatsoever. – Muboshgu (talk) 00:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Typical newbie mistake. Creator had less than 160 edits to their name, and also created Death of Prince, which is also at AfD. Softlavender (talk) 01:29, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not a mirror of Twitter. Esquivalience  t 01:39, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong delete My eyes are rolling. There's no need for a reactions article. The place to put notable reactions is his regular article, not a separate article created solely to memorialize him. This is an enyclopedia, not a tribute site. Dirroli (talk) 02:53, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I am the creator of the article and I urge MERGE with Death of Prince article There is a lot to write about the Death with reactions being only a small part. There are other death articles, like Death of Michael Jackson and Death of Jimi Hendrixs and Death of Adolf Hitler. Whiskeymouth (talk) 02:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Please read about WP:OWNERSHIP, it will help.  A dog 104  Talk to me 13:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I did not write that I am the owner of the article. I am the creator of the article and regret creating it. It should be merged and redirected to the Death of Prince article or the Prince (musician) article, preferably the former. Whiskeymouth (talk) 05:31, 26 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Reactions to X articles are generally a bad idea. When a particularly famous person dies, or a notable event occurs (like a natural disaster), it is common for many politicians /celebrities/etc to make statements/condolences/etc at the topic (whether via Twitter, or because a journalist asks them, or via a press release, or so on). We don't need to exhaustively document these reactions. It is better to just select a handful of the most notable ones and include them on the article at X, but be sparing in doing so, since X itself is generally more significant than these reactions to it. SJK (talk) 03:58, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge – I, as a British Wikipedian, wish to offer the great British compromise and suggest we merge this with the article Death of Prince. There is already an article on this, and it should not prove too hard to give this a new sub-heading. Having looked at the above comments the morning of today(the twenty-third of April 2016) I see that the very creator of this article is now calling for a merge which surely reinforces this request.Vorbee (talk) 05:57, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – Keeps the clutter off the Prince article. Cheers!  08:32, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge with Prince (musician). We can have these quotes from famous people on his article under the section on his death. --Ches (talk) (contribs) 09:01, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete/Selective Merge. There is nothing of singular notoriety about the death or its circumstances. Moreover, the rapid flurry to edit around this is substantially recentist, and it will be many weeks before we have the information and answers required to present an encyclopedic account of his passing. Finally, allowing the precedent that celebrities demand additional articles at their passing is an unhelpful one, given the longterm challenge of maintaining at high quality even one article per subject. In re: Selective Merge, I echo the immediately foregoing comments of Chesnaught555. Cheers. Le Prof Leprof 7272 (talk) 09:18, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Much like Death of Prince (which is an incredibly ambiguous title if you ask me as is this one) it's not been long enough since the event to actually document the effects of the subject's death beyond the immediate reactions. Currently, this article isn't neccesary and if needed could work as a subsection in a larger article with selective quotes but it can't stand alone in any form. tutterMouse (talk) 10:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 *  Merge - Merge into Death of Prince or Prince Nelson per WP:CHEAP, as this is too small for its own article, so long as Death of Prince exists. There is no reason to delete the information in this article without retaining its history.  Additionally, assuming that the title is ambiguous, we can change the title to something like Reactions to the death of Prince Rogers Nelson.  The article for Prince Nelson is over 130 kB, so splitting articles from it will reduce its size. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:19, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete The same as the death article. While it is incredibly sad that he has passed away there isn't anything specifically notable about it. This isn't like with Michael Jackson where there was so much controversy surrounding it and him.&#42;Treker (talk) 14:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Forked from Death of Prince verbatim and not what I would consider being of any encyclopaedic value. Why not try Wikinews for these things? Sam Sailor Talk! 16:31, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Too short, unlikely to grow substantially for now.  In the unlikely event that it is found to be necessary it can always be recreated later. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 17:17, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - any popular entertainer who dies will draw attention of other celebrities. I don't see how this is notable enough to warrant it's own article. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk &bull; contributions) 17:30, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete or consider merge and redirect to Death of Prince. Some coverage among reliable sources but duplicates the death article. TeacherA (talk) 18:11, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NOTNEWS. VQuakr (talk) 18:45, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete; keep a couple quotes as refs in Prince (musician). — JFG talk 21:46, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Possible merge; otherwise delete. A few of these reactions could be useful on the Prince page. Agree with User:EvergreenFir's reason for nomination and User:NinjaRobotPirate's idea about Wikiquote/Wikinews coverage. Just too short to have a long life, no matter how many famous (and non-famous) people may mourn Prince. If his death becomes a "culturally memorable" event, maybe this page should be revisited, but not until then. -- 2ReinreB2 (talk) 23:59, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Redirect: Seems like the best option to me for now is to redirect to Prince (musician). – Qpalzmmzlapq T C 02:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - aww hell no. Delete for every single of the reasons noted above, plus the content forking, and the fawning hero worship peacockery which is bound to fester in an article like this. After everything calms down and people go through a few days without "Purple Rain" being played on the radio 24/7, we can reexamine whether there is any significance to people's reactions to it. Do note that we (and this article, really) are a part of that reaction. There's no way to stay neutral. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 08:33, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete --ThurnerRupert (talk) 11:56, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete any meaningful content is already in the main article.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 14:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia does not exist to permanently archive things people said on Twitter. Bearcat (talk) 15:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Collections of quotations about events are unencyclopedic as stand-alone articles. I would also advocate only extremely limited coverage of this subtopic at the Prince (musician) article. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia is not a condolence board. DrKilleMoff (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Per others. This is just silly.--Yankees10 22:32, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Per many others.--DThomsen8 (talk) 13:24, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Per WP:SNOW. —  dain  omite   18:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and make sure any significant reactions are already in the Death of Prince article, which i obviously believe should be kept. reactions to the death of famous/beloved people are NOT particularly notable, esp. condolences and prayers. if its an evaluation of their greatness, that can be significant, like "prince was the best musician ever" or whatnot.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 17:51, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete and merge back into relevant Prince article(s). This needs to be merged back into the article called Death of Prince or if that article gets deleted under AFD, back into the original Prince article. I note that the reactions to the death of David Bowie, who was a celebrity on the same level as Prince (if not bigger as he'd been around longer) are part of the article Death of David Bowie and not broken out separately. Same for Death of Michael Jackson. There is no reason for Prince to be treated differently from these other major musical celebrities. TheBlinkster (talk) 02:39, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I really don't see the point in having a separate "reactions" article when the information could just as easily be covered at the main Death of Prince article. Kurtis (talk) 09:18, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Delete or redirect?
Despite all of the votes to delete the article, I started this subsection, as I feel that whether the article should be deleted or redirected (assuming that it cannot remain) is another question that should be addressed. Since redirects are cheap, and articles can contain valuable history, I feel that this search term as well as Death of Prince should not be deleted. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * There's no need for this, and it interrupts the discussion. There's already an overwhelming consensus to delete: 44 delete; 2 redirect; 6 merge; 3 delete or merge. I'm therefore collapsing it. Softlavender (talk) 00:16, 28 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per WP:NOTMEMORIAL.  Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 18:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Wikipedia is not an online memorial. Death of Prince still being processed, so no need for redirect as of now.  A dog 104  Talk to me 18:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Who would search "reactions to death of FOOBAR"? I understand redirecting the "death of" pages but not this one.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 20:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. Redirects should be something that a person could conceivably search for, like an alternate name, a common misspelling, etc. Who is actually going to search for "Reactions to the Death of Prince"? And even if someone did, "Death of Prince" would probably come up anyway. Redirecting "Death of X" to "X" (if we aren't going to have a separate article on X's death) makes more sense, because a person specifically interested in their death might include the word death in the search term; but who is going to be specifically interested in the reactions to someone's death, as opposed to just their death? SJK (talk) 21:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I also agree. Delete "Reactions to the death of Prince", merge "death of", my best compromise. Mlpearc  ( open channel ) 00:42, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:QUOTEFARM. GABHello! 22:11, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * delete Death of Prince is too many, this is another step beyond. Andy Dingley (talk) 15:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Next we'll have Reactions to reactions to the death of Prince.  Toddst1 (talk) 16:26, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete If anything this could be added to the page on Prince. As a stand alone article though, it's not needed. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:27, 28 April 2016 (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.