Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 Seattle cafe shooting spree

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. L Faraone 00:06, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2012 Seattle cafe shooting spree[edit]

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

Fails NOTNEWS and WP:N. News event without enduring coverage. MASEM (t) 20:21, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Of historical interest. This incident is also currently part of the gun-control debate. Moreover, it is cited by both sides in this very charged issue. Jewishprincess (talk) 20:38, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing beyond the time of the shooting, and a gnews spot check is not showing it coming up in mention. We do not need to document every crime committed. --MASEM (t) 20:48, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just this week the Seattle Times did a huge front page retrospective. Not saying that this makes it a national event but clearly a comprehensive news search wasn't made. Regards, Orange Suede Sofa (talk)
    - This article doesn't come up in a google search yet. But a local paper covering a local event a year later is not a big surprise, nor a sign of enduring coverage. --MASEM (t) 22:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ITSUSEFUL, then? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:25, 17 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:12, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This nomination is an example, in my view, of WP:POINT per this exchange from the heated debate at the N.O. Mother's Day Parade shooting article deletion discussion and I consider it disruptive, to say the least. Jus da fax 23:18, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Question will this article be of historical significance? This does seem like an article that could be developed but only six people died and I'm not sure if this event will have a lasting impact.--TV Man 13 23:27, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notability seems clear from press coverage. Everyking (talk) 22:11, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Press coverage is not equal to significant coverage by secondary sources required for notability. --MASEM (t) 22:14, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Export to wikinews. Lucy346 (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I recall it getting onto AP and other national news at the time (just short of a year ago), and the metro newspaper in the Seattle area had the recent linked article looking back. I think that's enough, given that the ongoing gun control debate keeps bringing up this incident and other attacks. Bearian (talk) 17:46, 20 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- A burst of national/international coverage at the time of the event is not considered enduring coverage, simply good third-party primary source to build up an article if the event merits one. A recall of the event a year later in a local paper (and nowhere else) is not a sign of significant coverage outside of the local area. --MASEM (t) 18:01, 20 May 2013 (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.