Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Killing of David Black

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. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:07, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of David Black (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)

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

WP:NOTNEWS. There is very possibly a suitable redirect target. TheLongTone (talk) 11:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I could wish Nom had run WP:BEFORE using a keyword like IRA, because this is a case that has had significant ongoing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:08, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Firearms-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:40, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:41, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Oppose Considering it was the first prisoner officer murdered since the Gfa and it has recieved enough media coverage I think its existence complies with wiki policy.Mico7898e (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well as the article creator I'd expect you to want it kept. But being the first prison officer to be killed since the Good Friday agreement seems a pretty slender claim to notability. As for the second point, coverage at the time is not enough (see WP:NOTNEWS).TheLongTone (talk) 13:59, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there a merge/redirect target? It seems more like a footnote in the history of the Troubles than an event which itself had lasting consequences (WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NOTMEMORIAL, etc). There is certainly no evidence of lasting consequences in the article as it stands. The current article is hardly worth keeping, with very little information and most of the space taken up by platitudinous quotations, but it's possible a better article could be written establishing the event's importance? --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep WP:SIGCOV plus new legal cases related to this murder by IRA terrorists is ongoing, simple gNews search here: [1].E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:30, 1 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - new information, the case has never been cold. --BabbaQ (talk) 10:49, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Ongoing coverage - e.g. from 2017 [2] [3]. Probably wouldn't have been notable at height of troubles (coverage would've shifted to more significant events) - but as the attack was carried out in 2012, it has received SIGCOV.Icewhiz (talk) 07:00, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the additional providing passes WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:50, 16 September 2017 (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.