Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanglewood Middle School 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 redirect to List of school shootings in the United States. Obvious target anyway. Spartaz Humbug! 21:02, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tanglewood Middle School shooting

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Tanglewood Middle School shooting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This appears to be run of the mill shooting, not much more. A lot of the coverage is WP:RECENTISM. It fails GNG. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 19:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep: Easily passes WP:GNG with coverage in large outlets such as CNN, Fox News, Yahoo, USA Today, New York Times, New York Post, NBC News, and even People among the numerous other reputable sources. WP:RECENTISM is an essay, not a guideline as GNG is. GauchoDude (talk) 20:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The relevant guideline is Wikipedia:Notability (events), especially the section about criminal acts. Notability of events needs evidence of lasting impact. The sources listed are standard news cycle coverage concentrated around April 1st. The crime is unfortunate, but it is all too common. • Gene93k (talk) 20:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair. I'll share my rationale in response to yours above. Re: WP:NCRIME, "...media coverage can confer notability on a high-profile criminal act, provided such coverage meets the above guidelines and those regarding reliable sources." In my opinion, above and to follow, I believe this has occurred.
    Re: your statement "Notability of events needs evidence of lasting impact," the event occurred on March 31st of this year. It's May. Per WP:LASTING, "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect." I would contend that this is currently ongoing. A WP:BEFORE search shows that many articles regarding the event are still being written as of May, the current month, such as this, this, this, this, and this among others. Additionally, it's part of the larger topic of school shootings in the United States and has been included, rightfully so, in articles like this, this, this, this, this, this, etc. which in my opinion goes to clearly satisfy all elements contained within both WP:LASTING and WP:GEOSCOPE.
    While you may feel that "The crime is unfortunate, but it is all too common," and I 100% agree with you, my interpretation of WP:EVENTCRIT shows that this incident meets all of the listed out points. GauchoDude (talk) 21:03, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Events, Schools, and South Carolina. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 20:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It happened over a month ago and this stub is all the info we have? I'm leaning delete if no other sources come up, one single person shot is tragic, but not terribly notable for Wiki purposes anyway. Oaktree b (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There are plenty of sources out there with much more info as I've listed above. This AfD, as all of them do, debate the merits of inclusion or deletion based on WP:N (in this case, the more specific WP:N(E)), WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:NOT. If you feel the article should be improved, I humbly invite you to do so and would love your contributions. GauchoDude (talk) 21:12, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:NEVENT and WP:NCRIME per my comments above. Big splash of breaking news coverage March 31st to April 1st. Strictly routine local coverage after the first 24 hours: arraignment, etc. Sadly, this is the once-a-week kind of shooting on topic at List of school shootings in the United States, where it is already included. • Gene93k (talk) 22:14, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep May I enlighten and encourage you, Checkers to maybe stop calling yourself a past inclusionist? I feel you never were one. What's next? Delete this and then move down the list of crises? EVERY school shooting (and or those with fatalities) has an article here. You do not understand many of Wikipedia's principles in the right way. You don't have clear concepts of notability. You misused run-of-the-mill and you don't get how one time events matter.Pictureperfect2 (talk) 07:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Gene93k. Coverage completely fell off after the day of the shooting. Love of Corey (talk) 20:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
L of C, the criterion you use is bad. Misconstruing the "coverage" of something as the value is easy to do and you fall into a predilection for it.Pictureperfect2 (talk) 00:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
WP:AGF. Love of Corey (talk) 05:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
agf doesn't apply here. Logic is not bound by principles or theories. Stating that many of the deletionists on here should re-examine how they view editing.Pictureperfect2 (talk) 06:17, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll give you two things to consider and from those you may have a change in how you see this. You put covid is the story of the century. That is certainly debatable as pandemics have occurred before. You're inferring that coverage of the covid situation makes it such a story (as well as the level of lethality it has). What you are leaving out is Putin and his invasion could be a larger story. You say that you are new to being here. Take a suggestion and completely evaluate what you think of the news, the coverage of news, and what is important.Pictureperfect2 (talk) 06:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your aggressive attitude isn't helping your cause any. Love of Corey (talk) 04:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this is a factually incorrect position per my statement above which lists coverage easily found in a BEFORE that contradicts the assertion of "Coverage completely fell off after the day of the shooting." GauchoDude (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. per Gene93k. Not really well known since all of the media coverage about it lasted less then 3 days. The article does not have much reliable sources besides NBC News. `~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 07:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    A humble request for reconsideration. My previous posts address both of your concerns. They show coverage in major, reliable news sources and that the coverage also spreads to the present day. If CNN, Fox News, New York Times, etc. are not reliable sources, then how would you define them? GauchoDude (talk) 12:49, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Where is the CNN, Fox News and New York Times citations? The only reliable source in the article is NBC News and Greenville news.`~HelpingWorld~` (👽🛸) 15:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@HelpingWorld: See above posts, I've listed many of them. The article does not include these citations, however that doesn't mean they don't exist as they can also be found through a WP:BEFORE and anyone can edit Wikipedia to include them. If your position is just of those two points (reliable sources and longevity), I've given examples to the contrary above in this AfD. If satisfied, while AfD's are not a !vote, I think it would then make sense to change yours unless I can address any other concerns you may have. GauchoDude (talk) 15:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Pinging the following from Talk:2017 Las Vegas shooting to help stimulate further discussion: @Mandruss: @Objective3000: @Nihlus: @Blysbane: @Fuzheado: @InedibleHulk: @WWGB: @Signedzzz: @Ianmacm: @Hydronium Hydroxide: @FOARP: @Chaheel Riens: @Knowledgekid87: @Natureium: @Cramyourspam: @Pincrete: @Jane955: @RekishiEJ: @FallingGravity: @DonFB: @Dlthewave: @Tutelary: @Elli: @Locke Cole: @Cullen328: @Jim Michael 2: @ProcrastinatingReader: @WikiVirusC: @North8000: @Veggies: @Qwaiiplayer: @ArvindPalaskar: @Kpddg: @Dumuzid: @ThadeusOfNazereth: @Mz7: @TrangaBellam: @Iamreallygoodatcheckers: @Khajidha: @JoePhin: @GenQuest: @Macktheknifeau: @Jayron32: @Joseph A. Spadaro: @Jjjimg: @Chesapeake77: @Amakuru: @Seggallion: Love of Corey (talk) 01:45, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Event Notability. No indication this is anything other than a personal dispute or drug deal between two people that went bad and just happened to occur at a school. As written, there is nothing indicating any notability. Not sure this should even be titled anything "...school shooting." GenQuest "scribble" 01:58, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to List of school shootings in the United States. I believe this fails to satisfy WP:NEVENT, particularly WP:GEOSCOPE. The vast majority of the coverage is local. Just having it mentioned in the context of other school shootings does not constitute significant converage and doesn't mean that the event has a significant impact beyond the local community. As with other school shootings that are not notable enough for a stand alone article, this should be redirected to the (regrettably) growing list of school shootings in the US. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 02:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Delete. In the absence of evidence of lasting and enduring significance at a national level, this appears to fail WP:NEVENTS. The sources offered by GauchoDude above in evidence of lasting significance are mostly local news coverage or mention this shooting only in the broader context of school shootings in general. The latter would justify inclusion in List of school shootings in the United States, but not necessarily a standalone article. Mz7 (talk) 02:26, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to List of school shootings in the United States per WP:LASTING. The question that should be asked is: what makes this particular shooting stand out among all of the other shootings on the list? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 02:36, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, a notable event with perfectly good sources. A real no-brainer. Joe (talk) 02:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or redirect - No evidence of lasting impact. Minor event of little note. -- Veggies (talk) 03:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep - the history of now is history --and no outstanding reason to delete Cramyourspam (talk) 03:41, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    AND "over 100 deputies" responded? that's historical. KEEP Cramyourspam (talk) Cramyourspam (talk) 03:43, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:NEVENT and WP:NCRIME, no lasting significance. Strictly routine local coverage after the first 24 hours: arraignment, etc. Sadly, this is the once-a-week kind of shooting on topic at List of school shootings in the United States, where it is already included.. I was ultimately swayed by this event's inclusion in the list article. At present there is no evidence of either any need or merit in the existence of this individual event article. Pincrete (talk) 03:52, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per GauchoDude. Plenty of sources demonstrated, and not just immediately after the event. Also, notability is not temporary. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:02, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This was a single apparent murder of an all too common type. The only unusual thing about this killing is that both the victim and the alleged perpetrator were quite young. Yes, many major reliable sources gave this tragic incident passing mention, but as far as I can see, there has not been any truly significant secondary coverage of this killing. The coverage we now see is primary source recapitulation of the police blotter. Our notability guideline says that A secondary source provides an author's own thinking based on primary sources, generally at least one step removed from an event. It contains an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources. We have none of that in this case. There are between 20,000 and 25,000 homicides each year in the U.S., and clearly very high numbers in other countries as well. These one off killings generate hatred and vendettas. Are we actually prepared to accept a flood of new articles about commonplace murders, and to maintain them against disruptive editing and BLP violations for decades to come? Cullen328 (talk) 04:35, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable event; while this got coverage at the time, the coverage was not sustained to the standard necessary for notability. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:47, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There is no such thing as a run of the mill shooting. Not in a school. Chesapeake77 >>> ♥ Truth 05:35, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep lets not become numb to all of this, it was a school shooting. That is reason enough. Chesapeake77 >>> ♥ Truth 05:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • So, Chesapeake77, you seem to believe that every single murder that takes place in a school is inherently notable, but that single murders that take place outside of schools are not inherently notable? Can you please quote any language in policies or guidelines that supports your personal opinion on this matter? Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 06:02, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Consider-- Many single murders are on Wikipedia if they are made notable by heavy news coverage-- As per @GouchoDude -- "Easily passes WP:GNG with coverage in large outlets such as CNN, Fox News, Yahoo, USA Today, New York Times, New York Post, NBC News, and even People among the numerous other reputable sources." Chesapeake77 >>> ♥ Truth 09:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Counterpoint': Nowhere in GNG does it say events need "heavy" coverage. Consensus recognises that three citations are enough to confer notability in general (and less than 3 can apply in some circumstances). Macktheknifeau (talk) 09:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a sad event, but it doesn't have enough significant or long lasting notability for a standalone article.--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 06:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cullen328. The coverage that exists is run of the mill passing news, not significant secondary coverage that would enable this to pass GNG.  — Amakuru (talk) 06:31, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect - replying here in response to ping. Redirect to List of school shootings in the United States. It's a sad day for humanity in general when the killing of a child in a school is not considered notable, but that's where we are. One death is barely newsworthy compared to other greater events - and the frequency of them. Chaheel Riens (talk) 08:45, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Doesn't fulfill wp:notability and not news. North8000 (talk) 09:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Easily fulfils GNG. The citations are not "routine" coverage as per WP:SBST, WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ROUTINE (which calls press releases, public announcements, sports coverage or tabloid journalism "routine"). As per WP:NCRIME, "media coverage can confer notability on a high-profile criminal act, provided such coverage meets the above guidelines and those regarding reliable sources". This article does that. The quality of the article itself is a topic outside of notability. An article which is notable may only require a short length or even a stub, but that is not a reason to delete it. Macktheknifeau (talk) 09:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Just to note I was summoned above, and I find the delete arguments more compelling. This strikes me as something which seemed like it might turn into something more, but ultimately did not (beyond the obvious tragedy). It does not seem to have coverage "legs," so to speak, though I'd also like to say that this one for me is a pretty close call. Cheers, everyone, and be good to one another. Dumuzid (talk) 12:55, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete because of lacking long term significance. --Seggallion (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Cullen328, who sets out a very detailed and persuasive argument explaining why having this article is problematic. That these shootings are so commonplace that individual ones cannot be proven to meet the notability criteria is a problem, but for US government policy, not Wikipedia. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:56, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Tanglewood_Middle_School_shooting&oldid=1092036285"