Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scott's Law


 * 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. ✗ plicit  00:03, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Scott's Law

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Local law in one particular state-there are similar traffic laws in many others. NOT NEWS  DGG ( talk ) 22:03, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:08, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:08, 5 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Oppose News citations alone show that this article is notable. Additionally, this law is eponymous, and notable due to its backstory and notoriety among Illinoisans; the words "Scott's Law" are printed on highway signage. While there are similar laws, referenced in the article and visible at move-over law, this law is specific in its scope and application. This law cannot be easily lumped together with other laws, nationally or internationally, that cover similar material. JustinMal1 (talk) 23:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * you've made a good case for a redirect to move-over law.  DGG ( talk ) 20:33, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm misunderstanding your argument as to why this should be deleted then. Local law, despite being local, is still relevant to the scope of Wikipedia. The transclusion list of the infobox template used on this page should be enough to prove that. JustinMal1 (talk) 20:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The list of transclusions seems to be instances of special or pioneering or otherwise distinctive legilation, not one which is essential the same as in every state, except for having a special name and a slightly wider scope.  DGG ( talk ) 01:10, 11 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "Pioneering" and "distinctive" are fairly vague words. As far as I can tell, other items on this transclusion list are similar in style to Scott's Law; eponymous pieces of legislation that bear similarity to extant law passed after a tragedy. For example, the first item on the list, Shannon's law (Arizona) is essentially a law prohibiting the reckless discharge of a firearm. Such laws exist across the country, but lack the eponym and the story. JustinMal1 (talk) 01:48, 11 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Exactly. So this is inordinate significance for a particular law. The PR considerations leading to the name, and the story behind it, are not encyclopedic material.  DGG ( talk ) 08:21, 11 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:50, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Meets WP:GNG. I don't think WP:NOTNEWS applies here, as it seems the sources provide evidence of "enduring notability". Suriname0 (talk) 17:28, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
 * 'Keep per WP:SIGCOV. I hate naming laws after victims (and if I ever die in some horrible crime or accident, please, folks, no legacy laws). However, this one appears to be notable. Bearian (talk) 20:50, 19 August 2021 (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.