Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The ipswich ripper


 * 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 redirect Tizio 15:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

The ipswich ripper

 * — (View AfD)

Originally prodded by me with the following concern: Source quoted (not, by the way, a tabloid) is the only source except for a bulletin board using this term, per Google. It seems The Independent is alone on this so far. This may change, until then this classes as a neologism. Author removed the prod tag and added several other sources, none of which use the term (the closest, The Times, uses "East Anglia Ripper"). I'm bringing this to AfD as a neologism; if the term gains wider acceptance I'll happily withdraw my nomination Tonywalton | Talk 20:20, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Nomination withdrawn. Admin, please Speedy keep; The redirect to 2006 Suffolk murder investigation by WP does the trick. Tonywalton | Talk 10:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment please note I am not disputing the deaths, it is the term "Ipswich Ripper" which is not widely used (yet, and may never be: Peter Sutcliffe is known as the "Yorkshire" Ripper, not the "Leeds" Ripper, for example). Tonywalton | Talk 20:34, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

provisional Keep and Rename Perhaps the article could be renamed something other than "The ipswich ripper" - if improved. At the very least, the capitalization is wrong. The subject itself could be made into a good article, but as it stands, it needs work. Aleta 20:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC) (modified Aleta 23:05, 11 December 2006 (UTC) )
 * Changing my vote to Delete given the existence of 2006 Suffolk murder investigation (thanks User:WP for the link). No need to replicate what already exists in a better page. Aleta 10:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment good point. I do have a concern though that this is very much ongoing; something on East Anglia serial killer of 2006 might turn out to be completely erroneous if this turns out not to be a serial killer. This is an encyclopædia, not wikinews (where this series of deaths doesn't seem to appear, as yet). Tonywalton | Talk 20:53, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletions.   --Slgr @ ndson (page - messages - contribs) 20:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. —  Brother  Flounder  (aka DiegoTehMexican) 22:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete This is nothing more than reportage of tabloid speculation with no demonstrable proof of linking forensic evidence for the crimes, which, being current events, should be on Wikinews if they are to be reported on any Wiki project. (aeropagitica) 23:00, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and clean up. Looking at Google News, this seems to be a notable offence. He also is called the East Anglia Killer according to the Sunday Times with police investigating three murders in Norwich as well as Ipswich. . The Independent, Scotsman  and . This is both verifiable and notable. Article needs improvement especially with sourcing. There is clearly room for articles on current events on Wikipedia. Capitalistroadster 02:19, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The fact that the current events tag just says things may change rapidly (and not that it should be deleted or moved) supports the idea that c.e. are within the purview of WP. Aleta 04:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per capitalistroadster. It is a current events but it is being investigated a serial killer and can be delted if they prove to unconnected. Agreed, though, that the title is a bit off and so should be renamed. Keresaspa 16:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to 2006 Suffolk murder investigation. Much better article there.WP 23:15, 12 December 2006 (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.