Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting (2nd nomination)

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 speedy keep, this is currently linked to from the Main Page, please stop nominating this for deletion. - filelake shoe  11:05, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting

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

Wikipedia not being a newspaper. Suitable candidate for transwiki to WikiNews Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 10:51, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Snow Keep - Bath School disaster; Virginia Tech massacre; 2011 Norway attacks; Columbine High School massacre. -- Veggy (talk) 10:56, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: So, less than 24 hours later, this has already reached the same levels of notoriety as the atrocities committed by Anders Behring Breivik and co.? --86.40.107.195 (talk) 10:59, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it has. Surprised? -- Veggy (talk) 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

TOO SOON. --86.40.107.195 (talk) 11:03, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and be done with it, as the nominator has said. Note that the first AfD, had such gems as "This is like not allowing the September 11 attacks page to exist". Please don't allow this one to descend to such levels of absurdity. --86.40.107.195 (talk) 10:57, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Above anon user's only contributions are to this discussion. -- Veggy (talk) 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Does that make them less relevant? Do I not have a brain? --86.40.107.195 (talk) 11:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep This is not a regular news story. This is one of the bloodiest school shootings in US...perhaps anywhere. By your logic Columbine and the Aurora shootings should also not have their own articles. There are enough reasons this should be kept, please stop wasting time and effort over nominating this. Theo10011 (talk) 10:59, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep OP is clearly derp 142.176.125.112 (talk) 11:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- What is derp? Sounds like a PA. --86.40.107.195 (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. This is a significant event, it killed several children in a school and it has gained worldwide attention. Clearly satisfies the notability guidelines. The fact that this article even made itself to WP:ITN also means alot to the notability of this article. These types of shootings are also fairly rare, I think. Also agree with what Theo10011 says above. Suggest speedy closure as keep. Hey Mid (contribs) 11:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Not to be remove --Olli (talk) 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 11:01, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the nominator is an idiot - Enough said. Notability has already been established. --Kuzwa (talk) 11:02, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose we can discount that equally idiotic argument as well. --86.40.107.195 (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep - This article has, in its notoriety, crossed the threshold from being mere news to being a historical event. The sheer reportage on this incident along with the depth its analysis in definitively indicative of its significance. Lord Chamberlain, the Renowned (talk) 11:04, 15 December 2012 (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.