Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Diego State University shooting


 * 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. Courcelles 23:43, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

San Diego State University shooting

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not-notable shooting, This is still just a local crime story -- there is nothing of encyclopedic value here. Night of the Big Wind talk  14:03, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Weak delete - This crime is mentioned in passing in the book Violence goes to college: the authoritative guide to prevention and intervention, by John Nicoletti.  And there is quite a bit of news coverage: but the coverage is mostly local (San Diego, CA). (added later):  changing !vote to Keep based on additional sources recently added.  --Noleander (talk) 15:45, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

These sources are clear evidence this is not merely "news", rather a notable historical event - based on coverage in secondary, academic, reliable sources. These sources can be added to the article, no reason to delete. Marokwitz (talk) 07:16, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Weak deletes   Almost makes wp:notability. North8000 (talk) 18:38, 1 September 2011 (UTC) Changed my feedback based on source additions. North8000 (talk) 09:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - in my opinion it has wp:notability.--BabbaQ (talk) 22:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article is extensively sourced. A bunch of other good articles were nominated for deletion and all will result in the same SNOW KEEP. If this immature disruption continues I will go to ANI. That's a promise.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 05:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ad hominem attack and threat without real arguments. Come back when you have them. Night of the Big Wind  talk  11:34, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * "Extensively sourced" is a real argument. Marokwitz (talk) 09:27, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. See for example the following sources:
 * "Murder in America", (2001) Ronald M. Holmes, Stephen T. Holmes. Page 155.
 * Pictorial history of world crime, Volume 2, p. 1015 (2004)
 * Feel free to edit. It is the public we serve... Night of the Big Wind  talk  11:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I added the sources to the article. Marokwitz (talk) 09:25, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete: A minor/local crime, not quite notable to be enciclopedic.--Cavarrone (talk) 08:06, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep per WP:POINT. See diff (bottom addition). —Ynhockey (Talk) 15:45, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 17:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Keep. The article appears well written, with emphasis on regional and national public interest. Streltzer (talk) 19:38, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I have added sources to the article from the New York Times, NPR, and the Los Angeles Times, showing that the shooting was not just of local interest. These together with the book sources added by Marokwitz are sufficient to meet notability requirements. --MelanieN (talk) 18:16, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep New sources show that it is not just of local interest nd appears to meet our requirements for shooting related articles. Silver  seren C 02:12, 7 September 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.