Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shooting of David Douglas: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
cmt per changes
Arguing case for notability.
Line 18: Line 18:
*'''Keep''' - per WP:GNG. Clearly good sourcing, noted case.--[[User:BabbaQ|BabbaQ]] ([[User talk:BabbaQ|talk]]) 12:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - per WP:GNG. Clearly good sourcing, noted case.--[[User:BabbaQ|BabbaQ]] ([[User talk:BabbaQ|talk]]) 12:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' {{ping|Autarch}}: Even with the addition of sources, there is still a problem, because you are now asserting notability for the individual via an an article on an event. This a common conflation - notability for an event is not notability of a person. If the event doesn't meet [[WP:EVENT]], then the event is not notable, and it largely doesn't matter ''who'' was involved in it, because [[WP:NOTINHERITED]] applies. If instead. you want to indicate that the ''victim'' is notable, then we need to address [[WP:CRIME]] and [[WP:BIO]], which is a different discussion entirely. At this point, we are concerned with an article that says "a career criminal was possibly shot due to his criminal career," and I don't particularly think that's notable in ''any'' country. Moreover, the coverage has to be greater than [[WP:NOTNEWS]] - the people you cited as famous criminals are famous because they killed dozens of people and oversaw illegal empires that raked in millions. Shooting a cop and drug possession and almost getting killed once are, honestly, parr for the course. Being PIRA? If there were six folks in it, sure, but there were a lot more than six folks in it, and they don't all get articles for that, again per [[WP:NOTINHERITED]]. So just be aware of all that. [[User:MSJapan|MSJapan]] ([[User talk:MSJapan|talk]]) 01:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' {{ping|Autarch}}: Even with the addition of sources, there is still a problem, because you are now asserting notability for the individual via an an article on an event. This a common conflation - notability for an event is not notability of a person. If the event doesn't meet [[WP:EVENT]], then the event is not notable, and it largely doesn't matter ''who'' was involved in it, because [[WP:NOTINHERITED]] applies. If instead. you want to indicate that the ''victim'' is notable, then we need to address [[WP:CRIME]] and [[WP:BIO]], which is a different discussion entirely. At this point, we are concerned with an article that says "a career criminal was possibly shot due to his criminal career," and I don't particularly think that's notable in ''any'' country. Moreover, the coverage has to be greater than [[WP:NOTNEWS]] - the people you cited as famous criminals are famous because they killed dozens of people and oversaw illegal empires that raked in millions. Shooting a cop and drug possession and almost getting killed once are, honestly, parr for the course. Being PIRA? If there were six folks in it, sure, but there were a lot more than six folks in it, and they don't all get articles for that, again per [[WP:NOTINHERITED]]. So just be aware of all that. [[User:MSJapan|MSJapan]] ([[User talk:MSJapan|talk]]) 01:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' {{ping|MSJapan}} Granted, the article has become a biography rather than an article on the event of his death, which is probably due to the information that has become available as well as the apparent lack of any developments linking it to the Kinehan-Hutch feud. Regarding [[WP:CRIME]], he took part in four raids in 1982, three of which he claimed were carried out on behalf of the PIRA, a claim accepted by the Gardaí, meaning he was acting on IRA orders. Given that the PIRA was a proscribed organisation in the Republic of Ireland, these, as well as attempting to shoot a Garda with intent to kill, go from being average criminal acts to being ones of subversion. (Also, membership in the PIRA was itself a crime in the Republic of Ireland.) His subsequent criminal career in illicit drugs is evidence of continuing criminal activity - combined with [[WP:BIO]], the article is referenced with multiple reliable sources, meeting [[WP:BASIC]] and [[WP:CRIME]]. [[User:Autarch|Autarch]] ([[User talk:Autarch|talk]]) 14:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 14:10, 9 July 2016

Shooting of David Douglas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

NN criminal, notability not asserted, WP:TOOSOON as an event article, WP:BIO1E (because it is still very much a BIO article masquerading as something else, and WP:NOTNEWS at this point as well. The fact that the subject's entire criminal history (which is also the majority of the content of this article) is sourced primarily to one article written after his death does not meet the BIO requirement of establishing notability prior to death. I assume this is why it was created as an EVENT article, and yet all we have is "the event happened." At the very least this is a footnote in the gangland feud article, but as no actual connection has been established, this should not be redirected there based on supposition, and the article needs to be weighed on its merits as a standalone article. MSJapan (talk) 20:31, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:49, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The subject is notable for several reasons: 1. Former member of Provisional IRA (and possibly expelled for involvement with illegal drugs), 2. Conviction for shooting a police officer with indent to kill, 3. Conviction for posession of 8kg of cocaine (sentenced to 10 years with 5 suspended), 4. Surviving a previous assassination attempt in 2015. This means that WP:BIO1E does not apply, as the deceased was notable for more than one event, particularly reasons 1, 2 and 4. Regarding sourcing, I will endeavour to add more WP:RS to support the article in the next few days. The question of links to the feud in question is a line of enquiry, as related by the Irish Times source in the article. Autarch (talk) 22:05, 3 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very very weak keep - The fact that he is/was a member of the IRA IS notable and mostly because I am siding with the comments of Autarch, but the article needs a REWRITE to SHOW notability. The article as it is written deserves a speedy delete, because all it really says is a good Irish boy went bad, became a criminal, sold drugs, shot a police officer and finally was shot at and finally killed. Tippytim304 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 02:15, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Subject is non-notable, so no idea why his death would warrant an article. sixtynine • speak up • 04:24, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • He is an infamous Irish criminal, and one that was IRA. Al Capone, Brian Nichols, John Gotti, etc.... are notable for their criminal activity. And I believe if he is notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia about Ireland/Irish topics, he is notable here, even if his name isn't worth much to an American. Tippytim304 (talk) 05:32, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per WP:GNG. Clearly good sourcing, noted case.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:58, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @Autarch:: Even with the addition of sources, there is still a problem, because you are now asserting notability for the individual via an an article on an event. This a common conflation - notability for an event is not notability of a person. If the event doesn't meet WP:EVENT, then the event is not notable, and it largely doesn't matter who was involved in it, because WP:NOTINHERITED applies. If instead. you want to indicate that the victim is notable, then we need to address WP:CRIME and WP:BIO, which is a different discussion entirely. At this point, we are concerned with an article that says "a career criminal was possibly shot due to his criminal career," and I don't particularly think that's notable in any country. Moreover, the coverage has to be greater than WP:NOTNEWS - the people you cited as famous criminals are famous because they killed dozens of people and oversaw illegal empires that raked in millions. Shooting a cop and drug possession and almost getting killed once are, honestly, parr for the course. Being PIRA? If there were six folks in it, sure, but there were a lot more than six folks in it, and they don't all get articles for that, again per WP:NOTINHERITED. So just be aware of all that. MSJapan (talk) 01:37, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment @MSJapan: Granted, the article has become a biography rather than an article on the event of his death, which is probably due to the information that has become available as well as the apparent lack of any developments linking it to the Kinehan-Hutch feud. Regarding WP:CRIME, he took part in four raids in 1982, three of which he claimed were carried out on behalf of the PIRA, a claim accepted by the Gardaí, meaning he was acting on IRA orders. Given that the PIRA was a proscribed organisation in the Republic of Ireland, these, as well as attempting to shoot a Garda with intent to kill, go from being average criminal acts to being ones of subversion. (Also, membership in the PIRA was itself a crime in the Republic of Ireland.) His subsequent criminal career in illicit drugs is evidence of continuing criminal activity - combined with WP:BIO, the article is referenced with multiple reliable sources, meeting WP:BASIC and WP:CRIME. Autarch (talk) 14:10, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]