Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David G. Ludwig murders

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 00:47, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David G. Ludwig murders[edit]

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

Declined WP:PROD. My original deletion rationale was "This is not a notable criminal. The subject fails WP:PERP by a distance, and WP:GNG, WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTNEWS by just as much." Prod noticed removed, the decliner stating, "Removed proposed-deletion-template due to invalid reason for deletion Subject is notable under WP:PERP: "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention..."" Brought here for the community to decide. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 07:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Appears to be another case of newsworthiness being misconstrued as notability. Mainly local news coverage with an article here and there picked up by other news outlets via the AP wire, etc. Does not appear to meet WP:PERP as indicated in the deletion rationale; no evidence this crime of passion is any more significant/interesting/unusual than any other. --Kinu ^t/_c 07:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Totally not notable, agree fully with Kinu.Athene cunicularia (talk) 19:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found this crime both interesting and unusual. Your typical crime of passion is man kills wife/girlfriend. In this one we have a home schooled kid who documented fantasies of home invasions, brought a bag of weapons when called to his girlfriend's home by the dad, left the bag at the door when asked to but then shot and killed both parents (with yet another gun). Next he disappeared with the girlfriend who evidentially left willingly. Suggestive that it is more premeditated than passion, and at least a cautionary tail if you happen to have a teenage daughter. There are around 15,000 murders per decade in the U.S. alone, so if this is not unusual there must be hundreds (at least) of other cases that are very similar. Personally I'm not aware of any, and I would be interested to see a few citations of such. --Quisicaluser (talk) 01:31, 2 November 2010 (UTC) — Quisicaluser (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- You state the subject is notable per WP:PERP (as per your comment above and per your removal of the PROD template) and that you find it interesting, but the problem is that there are no WP:RS to back that up. All of the sources show standard news reporting that is typical in a murder case without any sources that have significant commentary about the case and treat it as unusual. To say it is unusual based on the news reports alone is borderline synthesis. Also, to wit, the figure of 15,000 murders per year is significantly low-balled; this source indicates 15,000+ murders in 2009 alone. Most murders are not notable in the encyclopedic sense. Wikipedia is not a database of every single crime, and there needs to be significant indication beyond the standard local news reporting common to most murders of otherwise to consider it encyclopedic. Likewise, to say "if this is not unusual there must be hundreds (at least) of other cases... I would be interested to see a few citations of such" is an illogical argument. To show this case is notable/unusual, it must be shown that it is notable/unusual from the sources about this subject, and not assumed to be notable due to a lack of citations about other similar crimes. After all, those hypothetical crimes are not the subject of this article. --Kinu ^t/_c 01:53, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In my view, this article is a clear example of using Wikipedia as a newspaper: it has no enduring notability, it was created (originally as a BLP for David G. Ludwig) while the event was unfolding, and now it's long over. I see no benefit to keeping it around, and no recent improvements have been made to indicate otherwise. Athene cunicularia (talk) 03:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:21, 28 October 2010 (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.