Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert A. Hawkins

Robert A. Hawkins

He's an otherwise non-notable person who's sole notability is summed up in the article for the shooting spree. Dismas|^(talk) 06:51, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Not a noble way to achieve fame, certainly. But the rationale is twofold: first, he is widely reported by secondary sources. Second, I believe he has the requisite amount of historical importance, and his bio (even if short) is encyclopedic: eg, this appears to be a continuing narrative of modern America, these random massacres of the public by troubled young people. I have to say, however, I'm not too happy about Wikipedia's ongoing recentism, but..... you have to follow the policy.Brokethebank (talk) 07:09, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Individual is only notable in the context of the event, for which an article already exists. Previous consensus for Amanda Knox's involvement in the Murder of Meredith Kercher merged the articles in a similar fashion under the same protocol. Cumulus Clouds (talk) 07:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to the shooting. WP:BLP1E and all that. Daniel 07:18, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above (but technically, just redirect)... he's only notable in the context of the shooting, which already has an article. --Czj (talk) 07:24, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Don't grant this lowlife the notability he could never achieve until he ended his pathetic life. WWGB (talk) 07:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please, there's really no need for that. Regardless of your opinion of the subject, there's no need to go and make such statements, especially given how recent the event was and the fact that people who knew him would probably take offence to such. Wikipedia is a notable website and such comments do us no good in instances like this. Daniel 07:28, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"people who knew him would probably take offence to such" Are you serious? Nick mallory (talk) 09:25, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Westroads Mall shooting. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 07:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the shooting article he is a non notable person. Any useful info can just move to the article about the event. Chris! _ct 07:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the fact that other pages on infamous mass murders exist -- for example Dylan_Klebold. Sounds like a discussion on a general WP policy for these, regrettably too frequent, events is needed. Professor water (talk) 07:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Daniel. Mr.Z-man 07:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Westroads Mall shooting. Cite Cumulus Clouds's point on Murder of Meredith Kercher, but merging is the best possible outcome for keeping information on the event. Mattie^TK 07:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Daniel and others - No notability outside the single incident, reliable sources will dry up shortly. Klebold/Harris were an isolated exception which do justify articles. Also concerns re recentism. Orderinchaos 07:33, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect to Westroads Mall shooting. It should be noted, that Administrator John Reaves created the redirect which was then removed, and as mentioned, this person was not notable aside from this unfortunate event. Precedence shows that in the case of otherwise non-notable persons, the individual articles are usually redirected to the main article about the event, and do not warrant an article of their own. Ariel♥Gold 07:34, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- If the outcome of this debate is anything other than keep or no consensus, I strongly suggest the resulting redirect (and redirects for variants on this name) be fully-protected. Daniel 07:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Professor water's comments above. Kip Kinkel, Andrew Golden, Mitchell Johnson, Ronald DeFeo and other spree killers have their own pages; none has done anything noteworthy other than committing multiple homicides. Raider Duck (talk) 07:46, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Textbook case of this argument. Daniel 07:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge ... for now This is still a developing story. For now, I would argue that there is not enough information to sustain a single article, but that could change, and may even change before this debate is closed. On the other hand, there may never be enough significant information to develop an article. Professor water mentions Dylan and Klebold as having their own articles, though I wonder if the information for such an article existed within the first 48 hours after their notoriety was established. This will need to be monitored. LonelyBeacon (talk) 07:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, redundant. Tuxide (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. In his own words, "Now I'm famous." And so he is, as a top national news story. If anything, merge the "massacre" story into his bio. Mass killers are almost notorious by definition. NTK (talk) 08:12, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Westroads Mall shooting, per above. This article is an almost verbatim copy of the Perpetrator section of the shooting article. It gives no additional information about the person at hand, whose only notable action was the aforementioned attack. As both articles are quite short, I say merge unless someone can actually come up with content that would not be appropriate in the shooting article. ♠ SG →Talk 08:21, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This incident was called breaking news in the UK last night, surely that makes the event and its perpetrator notable, for now, I am sitting on the fence. Hencetalk (talk) 08:55, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per ArielGold. Merge as needed. Save for 2 sentences, this article is redundant with the shooting article. • Gene93k (talk) 08:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. All relevant information is contained within the source article, rendering a separate bio entry unnecessary, and given the circumstances, a little gratuitous. I am of the opinion that it is the event that is noteworthy, not the perpetrator. All personal information should be included under a sub-heading in the main article, and searches for his name redirected to that article. - Nick, 20:04 5 Dec 2007 (I'm in Australia) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.105.102.221 (talk) 09:05, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]