Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Central Michigan University 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 redirect to List of school shootings in the United States#2010s. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:24, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Central Michigan University shooting

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

Non-notable event without lasting impact. Veggies (talk) 13:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:36, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:36, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:36, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of school shootings in the United States#2010s. This should have just been a speedy redirect, no WP:LASTING coverage as Stoneman D. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:15, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "It may take weeks or months to determine whether or not an event has a lasting effect." It's been a day. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:38, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - And in that day, nothing substantial has come up. This story is over. -- Veggies (talk) 20:35, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Redirect to List of school shootings in the United States#2010s (it's already there, but it could use some more info). If more information comes out it can be spun back out, but for now there isn't enough to merit an article. ansh 666 21:13, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Too soon for a news story. Only when or if this has any historical significance, do you create an article, not before.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 23:14, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect. Breaking news stories like mass shootings or terrorist attacks always have an entry created, which is then debated for deletion if it turns out to be not notable, like this incident did. There are good arguments for creating an entry early on. I often look to Wikipedia for reasonably verifiable information about what has happened so far in an incident. Facts get verified as we go.EvidenceFairy (talk) 18:35, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, they shouldn't be created early on, especially since early reports are often wrong and/or full of speculation regarding basic facts. We aren't supposed to create articles based on what people want to read. ansh 666 19:10, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you'll ever be able to stop people creating an entry when a critical incident occurs. I've observed this dozens of times and speculation gets immediately deleted by other users. The goal of Wikipedia is to be encyclopedic, so if you want to stop people covering current/recent events altogether, you'd have to set an arbitrary timeframe. I just don't think it would work. Since it's going to happen, I think it's a better use of time to improve the sourcing and quality of the entry than to try and shut it down, until a decent time period has passed.EvidenceFairy (talk) 04:08, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge/Redirect It may be useful to include a summary of the information in an entry about school shootings in general. Existing entries such as List of school shootings in the United States are not time limited, hence they are long and unwieldy. There is notoriety in the pattern of school shootings so far in 2018 because they are getting increased media coverage, with a new protest movement, 2018 United States gun violence protests organized since the Marjory Stoneman Douglas Shooting. A new entry would provide a place to show information about smaller-scale shootings that are referred to in the public debate about gun laws.

If no new important information comes to light and the information in this entry is not moved to another page, I would support deletion on the basis that it lacks enough notoriety to be a separate Wikipedia entry. At the start of the one-day incident there was a chance it could develop into a more significant event. Once the incident was over it became clear that it was a domestic violence incident that, while it tragically cost two lives, does not have more notoriety than what happens hundreds of times a year in the USA.EvidenceFairy (talk) 18:30, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge I have sourced &updated text related to this shooting at List of school shootings in the United States#2010s, a cat that is sufficiently broadly defined as to include this in the list. My personal opinion is tha tthis should not be defined as a "school shooting" because it is in fact a personal, family shooting that happened to take place on campus. Tragic event; parents of a disturbed youth came to campus to take their son home, at which point the youth used a gun owned by his father to murder both his mother and his father. It is an awful, sad, a tragedy. But it is not a notable crime. Article can be recreated at a future date if some significant impact emerges.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:19, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of school shootings in the United States#2010s. It's worth a mention, but there isn't enough info to justify a full-fledged article.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:08, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge per above hints from the fellow Wikipedians. Though the article prevails in the Spanish language with the title as Tiroteo en la Universidad Central de Míchigan, the incident seems to be non-notable. Abishe (talk) 04:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete an incident where a student shot his parents, fails not news guidelines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:48, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect not nearly enough for a standalone article. Lepricavark (talk) 16:19, 10 March 2018 (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.