Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019 Grays incident: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 18:11, 23 October 2019

2019 Grays incident

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

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:NOTNEWS, WP:RECENTISM. No indication that this will have any lasting notability. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 17:19, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Just one of the biggest murder investigations in the UK, and an incident revealing issues of port crossings from Europe to the UK a week before Brexit. Yeah, no notability whatsoever. Kingsif (talk) 17:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep I am confused on why you are citing WP:RECENTISM as the very section says "Just wait and see. Remember there is no deadline, and consensus can change later on. Editors writing today do not have a historical perspective on today's events, and should not pretend to have a crystal ball. This is especially true during a news spike, when there is mass interest to create and update articles on a current event, regardless of whether it may be historically significant later on. Also, editors updating an article affected by a current event may not necessarily be the same ones participating months (or even years) later in the clean-up and maintenance of the page. Above all else, editors should avoid getting into edit wars or contentious deletion discussions when trying to deal with recentism." As in this is meant to be used for articles that are slanted towards recent events later down the line. As for WP:NOTNEWS, a large death count has led to broad coverage. I would wait at least a week before revisiting deletion here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:29, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep - close this AfD due to being ridiculous. An organised, international gang killed 39 people together. This is similar to the 2000 Dover incident - both are very historically notable. Jim Michael (talk) 17:32, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 October 23. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:46, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This is a definite keep. There are organized crime implications that are probably international.50.111.3.59 (talk) 17:49, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep - too early to tell about lasting notability. all I know is that it is notable now per WP;GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 18:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 *<small>'''Automated comment:''' This AfD was not correctly [[WP:TRANSCLUDE|transcluded]] to the log ([[WP:AFDHOWTO|step 3]]).  I have transcluded it to [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2019 October 23]].  —[[User:Cyberbot I|<sup style="color:green;font-family:Courier">cyberbot I</sup>]]<small><sub style="margin-left:-13.5ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">[[User talk:Cyberbot I|<span style="color:green">Talk to my owner</span>]]:Online</sub></small> 17:46, 23 October 2019 (UTC)</small><!--Cyberbot I relist-->
 *'''Speedy Keep''' This is a definite keep. There are organized crime implications that are probably international.[[Special:Contributions/50.111.3.59|50.111.3.59]] ([[User talk:50.111.3.59|talk]]) 17:49, 23 October 2019 (UTC)
+*'''Speedy Keep''' - too early to tell about lasting notability. all I know is that it is notable now per WP;GNG.[[User:BabbaQ|BabbaQ]] ([[User talk:BabbaQ|talk]]) 18:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)