Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steven Sueppel

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, surprisingly. Sandstein (talk) 19:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Steven Sueppel

Other than the fact that the person in question is in court so far and has supposedly been accused of another crime there is no reason to believe at this point that this person has actually committed a crime and the main sources offer no other information on this person's notability. Xtreme racer (talk) 19:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: See Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts)

Keep Steven Sueppel's actions are in many ways more horrific than those of Manson, Dahlmer or any of the now-famous mass-murderers. After all, he wasn't killing strangers -- he brutally killed his entire family with a baseball bat. If any person ever fit the heading of "mass-murderer", it's Sueppel. Piperpathfinder (talk) 19:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article should be kept. Especially for those that these events have personally impacted, and for anyone that can relate to simular events. I would offer that anyone that feels it should be deleted, but was not directly affected by this, first of all cannot speak for those that were by calling it "minor", and rather than delete the article, just don't read it.

After reading Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts), I agree with you. The Steven Sueppel page should be deleted.

The killings have been #1 or #2 result on US Google news all day today (http://news.google.com/nwshp?tab=wn&topic=n), so it may still be appropriate to start an article about the event (instead of the person). williameis (talk) 20:58, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While this is certainly tragic, shocking, and currently newsworthy, Steven Sueppel is not notorious enough to be a wikipedia subject. If any murder could be considered notable enough, there would be tens of thousands of pages dedicated to nutcases who murdered their families. Iowamutt (talk) 23:08, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. BLP doesn't apply if he's dead. While some editors consider multiple murders not notable, embezzlement on the scale alleged by prosecutors is difficult and relatively uncommon, two things which argue in favor of its notability. --Eastmain (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Iowa-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 23:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a mass murder and suicide. The article should no more be deleted than Manson or klebold and harris. John celona (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Comparing this to Manson or Columbine is absurd. Those were huge, front page national stories that were talked about for weeks and are still talked about 40 and (almost) 10 years later, respectively. Will you see entire documentaries devoted to psychoanalysis of this case in the years to come? Ha. Heck, this isn't even considered the top story in the country today. Iowamutt (talk) 00:08, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or Delete, the subject seems to just barely squeak by on notability. But I think the point brought up by Iowamutt is valid. I can, however, see a college student writing a paper on murderers and needing the reference. But because it is minor, perhaps it could be part of a list of "semi-notable" murders that put into a list as a whole then become full-fledged notable...I hope that makes sense. --Sallicio ^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 02:55, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete According to the WP:Guide_to_deletion: "Any notability of the crime is not automatically inherited by the victims or perpetrators of such crimes, and articles should not automatically be created on these individuals...." He does not meet the other criteria for inclusion. The crimes are appropriate for inclusion in Wikinews Wells50 (talk) 21:53, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obviously conforms to WP:N, and is a newsworthy story both for his history in the bank and the murder. ephix (talk) 00:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:Ephix. --RucasHost (talk) 11:27, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see no sense in wikilawyering over this. No Harm is being inflicted here so for me its a keeper. Albion moonlight (talk) 12:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep/rename Afet reading the notability guidelines for crimes, I think this should probably be an article about the event with a few details about Sueppel included. Aar☢n Bruce^Talk/_Contribs 15:34, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per John celona and Ephix. The article tells about a notable incident. --Appletrees (talk) 17:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Alex Heaton. I want to know more about him. Why are his kids asian? Are they adopted? --Appletrees (talk) 17:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alexheat (talk • contribs) [reply]
Keep/Rename per Aaron Bruce. David in DC (talk) 17:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Alex Heaton and others, this easily satisfies all of our guidelines for inclusion. (jarbarf) (talk) 17:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. Oliver Keenan (talk) 15:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Another editor has created a related article, Iowa City Sueppel Murders. --Eastmain (talk) 05:39, 30 March 2008 (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.