Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unarmed African Americans killed by law enforcement officers in the United States

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. (non-admin closure) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of unarmed African Americans killed by law enforcement officers in the United States[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Duplicative of Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak merge Race is an important factor for police brutality in the United States, which can be conveyed by adding a "Race" column to those lists where it can be confirmed by reliable sources. I can keep it as well, if you can prove that this grouping is notable in its own right. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:45, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Keep demonstrated notability in its own right ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 08:31, 18 July 2021 (UTC) but perhaps rename from "African American" to "Black". easy to find sources like[reply]
Keep. Not at all a duplication of Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States, which is a lengthy list that not only leaves out race, but also leaves out the fact that each of the victims on the nominated list was unarmed, which is a key point in the main title header of this entry. Also, the individual entries in the long list are unlinked, thus leaving users unable to determine whether each individual case has its own Wikipedia entry. On the other hand, each entry in the nominated article has a clear link to its individual Wikipedia entry thus enabling easy and immediate access to the article describing each event. Most importantly, the long article, with its hundreds of entries, has only 11 inline cites, with almost all of the cases listed in the nominated article remaining uncited, while the article nominated for deletion has 99 detailed inline cites. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:09, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Roman Spinner's reasoning. Clovermoss (talk) 14:44, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There shouldn't be a need for it, it shouldn't be so easy to find entries for it (which I am sure are jsut the well documented, well cited ones) but there is and it is, so the article stays. Artw (talk) 15:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:NLIST per sources provided by Trimton. Possibly could be moved to change "African Americans" to "Black People", but that's a separate discussion. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 16:21, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the excellent arguments by Trimton and Roman Spinner. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:57, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Roman Spinner's reasoning. This is in no way "duplicative" of the referenced list, because this list is focused on a specific subtopic of particular public concern. (Note that I believe "African Americans" is appropriate for the title, but a name change discussion could happen that talk page, if one is desired.) Danazar (talk) 22:11, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - verifiable information which meets WP:NLIST. -- Longhair\^talk 22:18, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Roman Spinner's reasoning. It would be wrong to delete this article because the so called "Duplicate" includes entries that cite all killings by police officers; regardless of whether or not the person was armed and without regard to race. I agree with Roman Spinner that this article is definitely not a duplicate of Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States. The article that is being considered for deletion is relevant enough to be its own article on Wikipedia. Evercool1 (talk) 04:15, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets WP:NLIST and verifiable info.BabbaQ (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I just found the article and noticed the "considered for deletion". So I expected to find a discussion of why/why not, here. But seems to be no pros/cons.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.239.38.25 (talk • contribs) 07:50, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Then you need to read this AfD one more time. Plenty of rationales for keep here.BabbaQ (talk) 09:04, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete "unarmed" is an overused word. This is a clear example of POV pushing. Some of these indviduals have weapons on them, some of them their having weapons is disputed, and some were in the process of using things like a vehicle as a weapon when killed which makes them clearly not unarmed by any measure. Some people have even used phrases like "unarmed knife wieder" which makes no sense at all.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:52, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment these seem like issues that can be resolved with editing and discussion (e.g. defining what is "unarmed" and which incidents belong on the list). Deleting would be WP:BATHWATER Qwaiiplayer (talk) 13:00, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Exactly, let's stick to the actual WP:DEL-REASONs. ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎ 10:14, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Concur with above comments; if there is ambiguity or disagreement about what "unarmed" means, that is enough to impact inclusion / exclusion of a particular incident (for example), the appropriate place to resolve the ambiguity is the article's Talk page -- not a proposal for deletion. Vague undefined allegations of "POV pushing" are likewise unhelpful to this discussion. Danazar (talk) 15:52, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Highly notable topic which easily meets WP:NLIST. The nominator's rationale is demonstrably flawed: this list is not a duplicate. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:15, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The purpose is to have a separate listing for these kinds of incidents, per all the arguments presented above by Roman and Trimton. There are other such lists floating out on the Internet, but are often unlinked, uncited, or include the killings of people who were, in fact, armed. These other lists are compiled because they are relevant to discussions of policing in the United States, adding to the argument that this article is relevant. Lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States could be improved by incorporating the ways this list stands out: including race, including armament, including city and/or police force, and citing each and every incident and their outcome. At that point, I would support merging the two if, and only if, the result could be easily filtered and exported and therefore be a more useful and complete resource. OctaviusIII (talk) 16:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep substantially covered in the press as a topic (specifically unarmed African Americans), and the fact that only bluelinks are on this list makes it substantively different than the lists of killings by law enforcement officers in the United States. If anything, it is those lists which should be blown up and replaced by more targeted lists on notable sub-topics. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 19:26, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highly notable topic. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 08:08, 24 July 2021 (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.