Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tnuza Jamal Hassan


 * 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. This is a BLP nightmare, if not an outright BLP violation, as many of the contributors here think. If the subject is notable, she will still be notable weeks or months from now when we can better judge. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Tnuza Jamal Hassan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article on previously non-notable person who at this point is accused but not convicted of a crime. Per WP:BLPCRIME, this sort of material should generally not go into BLPs, and under WP:BLP1E, its not certain she would get an article even if convicted. Nat Gertler (talk) 23:52, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 00:41, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 00:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:RAPID and WP:NCRIME. Per WP:PERP the article should be renamed to St. Catherine's University Arson Attack. National on-going coverage of this crime/terror-attack. Coverage sufficient for notability, save WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE which can not be evaluated due to this being a new event (though it has been covered since occurring) - requiring crystal balling on our part, hence this should be kept per WP:RAPID.Icewhiz (talk) 07:18, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 07:20, 23 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per Icewhiz .It should be renamed to St. Catherine's University Arson Attack. It has national and even International coverage and this has happened in a University.Passes WP:RAPID and WP:NCRIME.The only question is whether it passes WP:LASTING that question can be revisited after a few months.Hate crime ,Terrorist or religion motivated  attacks and Honour killing generally do have lasting impact.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 07:54, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * If it is going to be renamed, let me suggest St. Catherine University arson instead, because
 * The name of the university doesn't actually have the apostrophe-s in it.
 * "Arson Attack" is descriptive, not part of a proper name, and should thus not be capitalized
 * "Arson Attack" seems redundant. We wouldn't say "murder attack" or "robbery attack". --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:25, 23 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep -- disclaimer, I started this article. Nominator  initially placed a prod on the article. When I left some questions, on their talk page, about their policy interpretations, they called my questions "badgering".  I can't help noticing that this nomination is essentially the same as that used in the prod, even though I thought I had raised good questions over their interpretations of BLP1E and BLPCRIME.  I find that disappointing.  Geo Swan (talk) 14:37, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Would you care to restate your !vote rationale in terms of policy, rather than in terms of attacking me? --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Some people conflate civil and collegial substantive discussion over issues with personal attacks. I encourage you to make sure you don't make this conflation.  It is not good for the project.
 * On your talk page I responded to the BLP1E claim you placed in your prod, yesterday. I reminded you that ALL three of the numbered subsections of BLP1E are supposed to be satisfied, before an individual is considered an instance of BLP1E.  I drew your attention to the phrase "...is likely to remain, a low-profile individual."  I explained that domestic terrorists, in the USA, are very rare.  I compared US domestic terrorist to plain ordinary garden variety murderers. We never cover plain ordinary murderers.  We cover a small number of murderers who are in some way exceptional.  Ordinary murdeers are adequately covererd in our articles on murder, domestic violence, firearms, etc., because they are so similar.  Domestic US terrorists are so rare that claim removed for BLP reasons Geo Swan (talk) 22:27, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Domestic US terrorists are not all that rare, alas. The list you will find at Terrorism in the United States will show you many such incidents, and that is certainly not all of them. I have edited out your claims here about the subject of this article, who has not been convicted of anything and discussion about her is limited by WP:BLP guidelines. --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:46, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete or Rename The event is potentially notable not the person. TheGreatWikiGeorge (talk) 16:42, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This is an article about a 19 year-old woman who appears to me to be having some form of breakdown. The incident has had no lasting impact on either the building or the institution. In the very unlikely event that this becomes something more than an unfortunate episode in a young woman's life, we can always recreate the article. World&#39;s Lamest Critic (talk) 00:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Ms Hassan may or may not be having a mental health incident. Yes, the incident caused no actual casualties, and caused little physical damage.  But, she appears to have waived her right to protect herself from self-incrimination, and willing made some damaging confessions.  Anyone who actually read the article, or did their own google search and took even a minute looking at the articles covering her, will have seen she told investigators that she had hoped to burn the University to the ground, and cause extensive casualties.  I suggest it is not her actual result that matters, but rather her intent.  Many mass killers could also be described as young people who appeared to be having some kind of breakdown.  Their youth or possible mental health issues do not keep them from being notable.  You suggest this will likely be nothing "more than an unfortunate episode in a young woman's life".  Geo Swan (talk) 02:45, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I have read both our article and the sources used for it. I am aware of what she is alleged to have told investigators. She set eight small fires. "All but one of the fires were in trash cans," according to this report. Her actions and words do not align. At this point it is not known where Hassan was born or if she is a US citizen, yet she is being described here as "a domestic terrorist". This is irresponsible at best. World&#39;s Lamest Critic (talk) 03:57, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * There has been a bunch of problematic content involved. I just had to go strip out article claims that there was a list of charges of which arson was the worst (source only said one charge of arson); that she was still in custody (source, a Monday article, only said that she was in custody on Friday night); and that she would have her next hearing next year (reality: next month.) The net effect of demonizing her with false information is of real concern. That the same editor asserted today the suspect's guilt on another Wikipedia page keeps this a matter of severe BLP concern. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS / WP:TOOSOON / WP:BLP. The subject has not yet been convicted, and the article reads like a news story. No apparent lasting significance just yet. If the incident is still remembered in six months, then sure, an article would be appropriate. But Wikipedia is not a newspaper. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:28, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems like routine news-of-the-day, a minor campus crime incident. Nothing particularly notable about arson, no significant impact beyond the local region. ValarianB (talk) 16:24, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP1E are relevant here. Lankiveil (speak to me) 23:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC).
 * Delete. Fails WP:BLPCRIME, WP:BLP1E. We are not a police blotter for the reporting of minor crimes. Calling this an "arson attack" like it's some kind of coordinated terrorist plot is a hell of a stretch. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:42, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Local, minor-crime story that wouldn't even rate a mention in a Minnesotapedia, if one existed. Whoever wrote this inflated nonsense should know better. --Calton | Talk 05:35, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Local 1E crime. EEng 07:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - and rename. This passes WP:RAPID and WP:NCRIME. LASTING can not be evaluated at this time.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note - I was recently criticized by the article creator for having edited the article while it was under AFD. As this is a BLP of a subject who is likely receiving more attention (and thus having this page referenced) than they ever have or will again, I thought it best to remove or correct statements that did not match sources, particularly those that painted her in a negative light. This included falsehoods and unsourced damaging claims that were added by the complaining poster after the start of the AFD (such as the claim that her next court date was more than a year away, that she had "charges" of which one was the "most serious" when the source listed just a single charge, and that she was "currently" being held in custody.) If anyone wishes to see the article's state before the AFD, it's here. --Nat Gertler (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I also edited the article after it was nominated for deletion. I removed the categories "Muslim terrorists" (which is does not exist) and "arsonists". There is no source indicating that Hassan is a Muslim. She has not been charged with terrorism. She has not been convicted of arson. Geo Swan should probably be banned from BLPs. World&#39;s Lamest Critic (talk) 03:21, 28 January 2018 (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.