Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Cook (criminal)

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 delete. Kurykh (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Cook (criminal)[edit]

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

Fails WP:BLP1E (he killed two people, and that's about it). The only sources I can find about him are regarding his execution. Primefac (talk) 20:02, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:22, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless some evidence is brought forward that the subject meets any criteria of WP:PERP. Reading through that notability guideline again, however, I am very not convinced he passes, and I also am unsure of any alternative content the biography could be merged into, except a quick mention at List of people executed in Georgia (U.S. state). Yvarta (talk) 21:00, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sources Here's what I found. Case of an unmotivated slaying of 2 random college students. Significant coverage in the big regional papers The Atlanta Journal-Constitution and The Florida Times-Union, first of the police search for a suspect, which went on for well over a year. Good detective work and public cooperation finally resulted in the arrest of Cook, whose father came to see him in jail. The jailed suspect confessed the drime to his Dad. Imagine that father's situation - the newspapers certainly did. Father reports what his son has confessed to - this is where the story really takes off. The father happened to be an FBI agent. Anti-death penalty groups argued that since Dad had not read the son's Miranda rights to him, his testimony was invalid. They appealed the Supreme Court of Georgia (U.S. state), which upheld the death penalty. All of these from a quick scan of the articles in those 2 newspapers. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:52, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely an interesting case. I'm still leaning to think that the sources' content is focused such that the case itself, and not Mr. Cook, is what could pass the notability guidelines, as I would argue that Cook runs afoul of WP:ONEEVENT. Might you have thoughts on a good topic name for the crime/case itself, which the biography could be merged to? That way the key details could be kept. Yvarta (talk) 01:21, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't know; I had never heard of the case until I found it here today.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I agree that it was an interesting case, with sufficient coverage of a non-routine kind to confer notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:39, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ Delete No compliance with WP:Before. There are lots of sources out there, and this is a unique case and perpetrator. Fits WP:GNG. The decision to execute him was controversial. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 20:48, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I should not had created this articule in the first place. Ilovehorrorstories (User talk:Ilovehorrorstories) 13:37, 2 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The coverage is not widespread or sustained enough to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 04:10, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete According to WP:PERP, a convicted criminal is only suitable for a stand-alone article if "The victim of the crime is a renowned national or international figure, including, but not limited to, politicians or celebrities" or "The motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual—or has otherwise been considered noteworthy—such that it is a well-documented historic event. Generally, historic significance is indicated by sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role". Neither of these criteria are met. Furthermore, according to WP:1E, "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate. The assassins of major political leaders, such as Gavrilo Princip, fit into this category, as indicated by the large coverage of the event in reliable sources that devotes significant attention to the individual's role" - tens of thousands of people commit murder worldwide every year. There is no evidence this individual offender was exceptionally notable. AusLondonder (talk) 22:15, 6 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've reconsidered. AusLondonder is (IMO) correct, and I am persuaded. Moreover, this article was created by a WP:Sock as appears here. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 16:41, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I'm not overly convinced this is a sock account. I mean, a two-year-dead sock coming back to write an article and make minor disruptive edits? Even if is socking, there's no way to verify it. Primefac (talk) 16:55, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong about that. If you go to the link the user admits he is sock. here. The admission removes any reasonable doubt. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 17:11, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I could claim that I was a sock of User:Meloneras, but I would probably be laughed out of the room. They're indeffed, so I don't really care if they are a sock. My main point with bringing it up is that I don't think this qualifies for a G5 speedy. Primefac (talk) 17:14, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - focusing on whether a sock created this loses sight of the fact that it's a crappy stub about a marginally notable criminal. Bearian (talk) 23:23, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was not focusing on it. I agree that it is not within a WP:GNG article and WP:PERP seems to control. The sock problem is part of the context, however. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 23:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:39, 8 February 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.