Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sparks 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 keep. Rough consensus states that the event has continued to receive in-depth coverage. (non-admin closure) Jim Carter (from public cyber) 07:40, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sparks Middle School Shooting

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

Our criteria for keeping crime stories is that the event needs to have some long term impact and ongoing coverage. This event didn't. It is very tragic, and even more tragic, is that the event just isn't that rare anymore. The article was Prod'd with two seconds and I want to quote the original prod justification: "Tragic event, but does not meet WP:EVENT or WP:CRIME due to lack of persistent coverage or long term impacts in the school industry, unlike Sandy Hook, Columbia, or Virginia Tech" (173.3.79.101) The article was originally an article on the school itself, and I probably should have just boldly merged its contents on the shooting to the school district's article when I moved it to its current title, but I would not oppose redirecting it to the appropriate school district article. John from Idegon (talk) 20:01, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CRIME pertains to the notability of individual persons. I believe that the proper standard of judgment for this event is WP:EVENT. See my comments below.ShulMaven (talk) 01:40, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nevada-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 22:47, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 22:47, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 22:47, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:NOTTEMPORARY I believe that Nom misinterprets WP:EVENT, which does not require that "have significant impact over a wide region" but, rather, merely states that notable events "usually" have such impact. (although, cumulatively, school shootings have had such impact, and this one may have had it regionally or in some other, as yet unknown way.) What it does require is that the event "must receive significant or in-depth coverage" This incident clearly did. Notability, moreover is WP:NOTTEMPORARY :"Notability is not temporary; once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage". But beyond the black letter law test, which this article passes, there is this quesiton: What use is Wikipedia except in exactly situations like this, a terrible murder/event that occurred some time ago but which, if someone wants to know about it, is summarized in a reliably-sourced article on Wikipedia.ShulMaven (talk) 01:17, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, national coverage did continue (just added a 2014USA Today article) I believe that editors should at least do a google search, and perhaps even attempt to improve articles before starting the AFD process.ShulMaven (talk) 01:25, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. I had seconded the proposed deletion based on the apparent paucity of sources showing a lasting impact, and I thought it was (sadly) run of the mill. I stand corrected. Bearian (talk) 19:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The shooting did receive wide-spread national coverage at the time and continued regional coverage. --I am One of Many (talk) 08:27, 3 December 2014 (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.