Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/YouTube headquarters shooting

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Bit early, but if I would've come across this earlier, I would've closed as snow keep. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 01:53, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube headquarters shooting[edit]

YouTube headquarters shooting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A minor incident with one fatality (the shooter). WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NEVENT don't appear to be met - coverage is limited to the few days following the incident, which wouldn't even get any coverage if it happened at a less famous company. I recommend redirecting to History of YouTube where this is already mentioned. Perhaps merge a few sentences, as this incident is covered there in just one sentence. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

siroχo 08:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Siroxo. Normally an event like this wouldn't be notable (and we could really benefit from cleaning this area up), but it seems that because the perpetrator was a woman, it's become a WP:CASESTUDY (that shortcut was just created today and it's already useful). Of course, if there were a proposal to merge this into a larger topic, I wouldn't object. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Siroxo. Killuminator (talk) 18:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Siroxo. Hypotheticals aren't really strong arguments: if JFK was just an unknown guy when he was shot, his death wouldn't get the same kind of coverage. ~ Pbritti (talk) 21:10, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as the event's notoriety goes beyond number of victims and targeted company, as shown above. Rkieferbaum (talk) 20:34, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Siroxo. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:55, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Siroxo. This is very obviously not just a routine event covered in local news, as reflected in the sources mentioned. Steven Walling • talk 01:30, 26 August 2023 (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.