Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephan Balliet


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:31, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Stephan Balliet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this article is the alleged perpetrator of the 2019 Halle synagogue shooting. Per WP:PERPETRATOR, "a person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person". He is not notable beyond the Halle incident, and everything that needs to be said about him can be included in the Halle article. WWGB (talk) 04:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Delete and move the relevant content to the Halle attack article. —  Mathieudu68  talk 19:17, 26 October 2019 (UTC) Delete as per above --Franz Brod (talk) 11:59, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * , you don't say what should happen to the content that is not relevant to the Halle attack article. Did you click on the link to look at the google search for Balliet?  Did you notice there were considerable articles about Balliet, specifically, and his background?  So, thought experiment, if you add up all the references that contain information you consider "not relevant" to the article on the attack, would or wouldn't this information measure up to GNG?  Geo Swan (talk) 17:10, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:PERPETRATOR "a person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person". Why should there be an exception? —  Mathieudu68  talk 20:45, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Well, for starters, I suggest PERPETRATOR was written for ordinary crimes. 99.9 percent of perpetrators are nobodies, reporters don't cover them at all, or barely cover them, because their crimes are mundane. Balliet's crimes were truly exceptional.  Killers who live-stream their killings are so rare, in 2019, we may be able to number them on our fingers.  And, unlike 99.9 percent of perpetrators, he has been investigated, and written about, in detail that satisfies GNG many times over.  Just so we are clear, are you saying your own web searches hadn't already brought this to your attention?  I highlighted "normally" in your quote from PERP.  There is nothing normal in this crime, or in this criminal.  Geo Swan (talk) 00:16, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I think his fame does not exceed the Halle attack. His life and ideology are interesting in that they motivated the attack. The Stéphane Baillet article is irrelevant outside of the context of the Halle attack. Just compare with Brenton Harrison Tarrant, the shooter of Christchurch: Tarrant has no separate article, even though he wrote a manifesto and drew the attention of the media right after the attack. Same for the Kouachi brothers who perpetrated the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris. However, Anders Breivik has a separate article because his trial and prison life were widely echoed in the media and in literature. —  Mathieudu68  talk 01:14, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * You write "The Stéphane Baillet article is irrelevant outside of the context of the Halle attack." To someone interested in understanding jihadis, who live-broadcast their attack, it is the actual attack that is irrelevant.  As for whether Brenton Harrison Tarrant, or the Kouachi brothers, have standalone articles, there is an essay many wikipedia contributors find offers useful advice -- WP:Arguments to avoid.  It has a section I think is relevant here WP:OTHERSTUFF.  Have you re-read it recently?  Cheers!  Geo Swan (talk) 03:51, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 04:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 04:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 04:51, 26 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Nomination quotes WP:PERPETRATOR, "a person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person."
 * Note the "normally". Is Balliet a "normal" perpetrator?  Well, he wrote a manifesto.  Should the manifesto be considered part of the attack? We have a fairly large paragraph about the manifesto, which someone might excise, next week, next month, as "off topic".  Similarly, does 2019_Halle_synagogue_shooting belong in the 2019_Halle_synagogue_shooting article?  Isn't it also off-topic?


 * Real world topics are linked to other real world topics. Some real world topics are linked to many other notable real world topics.  When a cluster of notable real world topics are all linked to one another we could create suitably referenced smaller standalone articles on each topic that was backed by sufficient references, which each wikilinked to the articles related to it.  The alternate approach, favoured by this AFD, is, definitely inferior, in cases like this.
 * No offense, but this nomination is really a stealth form of censorship. Deletion, in this case, is bad for the wikipedia.  This nomination assumes anyone looking for information about Stephan Balliet is REALLY only interested in the shooting.  Or perhaps they are trying to impose a moral judgement that those interested in Stephan Balliet SHOULD only interested in the shooting.  No offense, but I think it reflects a failure of imagination.  Readers could be wanting to read about Balliet because they want to read about all terrorists who live-streamed their attacks, because they are writing a high school or undergrad essay about terrorists who live-stream.  In that case the shooting itself is extraneous information they just have to filter out, every time they go to the article.  So, in this case, deletion is damaging to our readers, or damaging to the wikipedia.
 * Similarly, The Telegraph reports police are trying to trace a 750 pound bitcoin transfer he received... They are looking into whether it indicates he was part of a network. It explain how an unemployed guy was able to build or acquire his arsenal. This, also, doesn't really belong in an article on the attack.
 * If we accept that this article shouldn't be deleted half or more of the contents of 2019_Halle_synagogue_shooting that is focussed on Balliet really belongs in this article. Geo Swan (talk) 17:01, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Balliet's notability comes entirely from the attack. There is no reason to have a seperate article on him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:31, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:TOOSOON and WP:PERPETRATOR. It's too early to tell whether or not there will be sustained coverage on this person.4meter4 (talk) 14:00, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree merging to the shootings article is appropriate. This man is only notable for this attack for now.--Roy17 (talk) 16:18, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete per above comments + consideration needs to be given of the consequence of highlighting the perpetrator of the atrocity over and above the criminal act itself. This partly relates to WP:NOTNEWS, but I would argue thresholds should be higher to justify separate articles on the perpetrator in these types of cases (ie mass atrocities). --Goldsztajn (talk) 14:52, 4 November 2019 (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.