Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Villejuif stabbing: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
Jim Michael (talk | contribs) |
re |
||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
*'''Delete''' - This is an example of why we have [[WP:NOTNEWS]], also trying to predict what may or may not happen falls under [[WP:CRYSTAL]]. I do not see coverage in this article that meets [[WP:DEPTH]] other than routine reporting. - [[User:Knowledgekid87|Knowledgekid87]] ([[User talk:Knowledgekid87|talk]]) 19:38, 4 January 2020 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' - This is an example of why we have [[WP:NOTNEWS]], also trying to predict what may or may not happen falls under [[WP:CRYSTAL]]. I do not see coverage in this article that meets [[WP:DEPTH]] other than routine reporting. - [[User:Knowledgekid87|Knowledgekid87]] ([[User talk:Knowledgekid87|talk]]) 19:38, 4 January 2020 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' - there is enough coverage in enough countries to fit the notability criteria. [[User:Jim Michael|Jim Michael]] ([[User talk:Jim Michael|talk]]) 21:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' - there is enough coverage in enough countries to fit the notability criteria. [[User:Jim Michael|Jim Michael]] ([[User talk:Jim Michael|talk]]) 21:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC) |
||
:*Yes, but are they parroting the same narrative? This isn't called extensive coverage if one news source is saying the exact same thing as another news source. You also have to keep in mind that groups of news organizations are owned by the same parent company. - [[User:Knowledgekid87|Knowledgekid87]] ([[User talk:Knowledgekid87|talk]]) 21:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 21:48, 4 January 2020
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Villejuif stabbing (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)
WP:NOTNEWS This story rated three column inches in today's Guardian, and I verymuch doubt that it will have any lasting significance. TheLongTone (talk) 14:06, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep the attack has been covered in-depth in France, Germany and the UK thus amounting to WP:SIGCOV Since there is a suspected ideological motive, the attack will likely analyzed by Europol and included in their reports. Most similar attacks easily pass WP:SIGCOV. A Thousand Words (talk) 14:41, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- The secretary of state has commented upon the attack. It is therefore at the national level of French government, not a neighbourhood crime. A Thousand Words (talk) 14:57, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- If this is just a random stabbing without any motive like many others, you can delete it. But I think that we have to wait the investigation. If this is stabbing is terror-related, with a religious or a political background, the article is necessary. User:Gianluigi02
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (📧) 15:12, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (📧) 15:12, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Delete - This is an example of why we have WP:NOTNEWS, also trying to predict what may or may not happen falls under WP:CRYSTAL. I do not see coverage in this article that meets WP:DEPTH other than routine reporting. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:38, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep - there is enough coverage in enough countries to fit the notability criteria. Jim Michael (talk) 21:27, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, but are they parroting the same narrative? This isn't called extensive coverage if one news source is saying the exact same thing as another news source. You also have to keep in mind that groups of news organizations are owned by the same parent company. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC)