Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Rajdev Ranjan

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. As I've mentioned elsewhere, the NOT NEWS guideline seems to depend upon how the people at the afd choose to interpret the situation. Most of the ones that come to afd could be rationally argued in either direction. In this case, the local decision is apparently to keep. DGG ( talk ) 09:14, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Rajdev Ranjan

Murder of Rajdev Ranjan (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 §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:43, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 08:43, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep This murder case has received great deal of coverage in national media. Meets WP:GNG. Don't go by the present article size. Just use your search engine. --Skr15081997 (talk) 09:08, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:ONEEVENT notability. A person is shot-dead and media published news-reports. Wikipedia is not a Newspaper. I do not think there is one single coverage of subject when he was alive (I tried to find one here). Anup [Talk] 15:22, 30 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:04, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: I agree with Anupmehra on it being a One Event case. CyanoTex (talk) 08:32, 3 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Of course Anup is right in saying that the reporter didn't receive coverage when he was alive. That's why we don't have an article on the reporter himself, it was his murder (on 13 May) that received wide coverage. Here's the most recent article (2 October). If you check Google News you will find 100s of results for the subject. Please consider them too. --Skr15081997 (talk) 07:13, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The so called recent article is published by the group where he worked. That's not independent enough for counting in wide coverage. §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {Talk / Edits} 04:38, 7 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dharmadhyaksha: check India Today, The Indian Express, Firstpost, The Indian Express and Firstpost. These are independent of the reporter and cover the subject in great detail. --Skr15081997 (talk) 12:40, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - per WP:GNG. plenty of good sources are available, it has received plenty of attention. the article is small and badly written but that is not relevant in comparison to notability guidelines.BabbaQ (talk) 17:21, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I feel the need to elaborate my !vote a little. It is argued that not "person" but the "event" in which he was shot dead is notable. Thus, I opened WP:NEVENT and found this:

WP:LASTING: no evidence.

WP:GEOSCOPE: no evidence.

WP:INDEPTH: reasonable coverage (mostly "recent").

WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE: nope, I rather see WP:ROUTINE coverage.

WP:SENSATION: yes, confined to a region (for a week or two).

I'm open to amend my !vote if anyone could address issues listed above or explain in simple words how after failing above criteria it is a notable event for encyclopedia. Anup [Talk] 08:14, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning keep as the murders of journalists tend to be notable. For example, here's from a recent coverage (Sept 2016):

• The CBI took over the case from Siwan police which said Ranjan's killing was part of a premeditated conspiracy.

If a conspiracy is alleged, then there may be more information as to who was behind the conspiracy; why was the journalist targeted; what impact did the murder have on the journalist profession?

I would say keep for now; if there are no developments in the next three to six months, then renominate. K.e.coffman (talk) 07:59, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Leaning Keep - I am usually pretty strict with WP:ONEEVENT and WP:NOTNEWS. This one however, seems to have some recent on going coverage which is involves some Indian politicians as well. See 17 Oct, 7 Oct, 28 September. I would prefer to actually wait for 6 months before renominating this. If the coverage ceases, then I would be glad to go with a delete. I guess this is best closed as a "no consensus" at this point. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:36, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and improve article, which is now paltry although the sources found by searching his name appear to support notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 10:05, 20 October 2016 (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.