Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brampton Courthouse Shooting

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 02:39, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Brampton Courthouse Shooting[edit]

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

Poorly sourced article about an obscure shooting incident that fails the ten-year test for enduring significance. Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS, so it's not our role to create or maintain an article about every single thing that happens anywhere at all, but this demonstrates no enduring notability. There are just two sources here, one of which is reduplicated as a third footnote for no apparent reason: one is a press release from the SIU, who were directly involved in the matter and thus represent a primary source that verifies facts but does not assist in demonstrating notability, and the other is a single piece of purely local human interest coverage about the recovery of the cop involved. We do not need to maintain an article about every single incident in which somebody ever got shot, and this is not sourced anywhere near well enough to make this shooting a special case. Bearcat (talk) 20:18, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 20:19, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 07:33, 6 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Local / national level coverage mainly on on the news-cycle in March 2014 and then a bit more as bits and pieces came out of the investigation. Not mentions out there after 2014 in news orgs.Icewhiz (talk) 11:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
delete sad instance of family-related violence; routine/minor news coverage that soon petered out.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:12, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The only way I see of salvaging the article would be if someone could bring WP:RS into why the actions of a policeman shot in the abdomen and of another one shot at (but mercifully missed) require an internal affairs investigation. I guess Ontario cops should from now hand flowers and say "pretty please" while under armed attack! In the absence of such context of the societal impact of the bureaucratic trial the victim policemen underwent, the article as it stands does not seem salvageable. Therefore, alas!, Delete. XavierItzm (talk) 18:43, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
From what I read IA investigates all shootings. They were criticized for the time it took - but they closed the case some six months after the shooting and praised the officers involved (which was the last spurt of coverage this got - in Oct 2014).Icewhiz (talk) 19:02, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Icewhiz is correct. At least in Ontario (I can't speak for elsewhere), the SIU always investigates every shooting that involves cops at all, to determine whether proper procedures were followed and whether disciplinary action is needed or not. Bearcat (talk) 16:16, 9 April 2018 (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.