Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoffrey Branch

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. Sandstein 20:46, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Geoffrey Branch[edit]

Unverfiiable. Impossible to know if true or a prank. -- Chris is me 22:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. Once I got past the Wikimirrors I found a Geoffrey Branch who died of a job-related fall in 2004 and a Geoffrey Branch who was/is(?) the CEO of Cartoon Network. No mention of the suicidal axe-murderer. Redirect to Cartoon Network until someone decides to write an article on the CEO Geoffrey Branch. B.Wind 23:12, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no sources cite, and googling finds no indication of an axe-murderer by that name, nor is there any evidence through google news. -- Whpq 23:14, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As an an article whose title is that of known living person, this should be speedy deleted as an attack page per WP:CSD G10. If the author returns with an article with verifiable sources, it can be restored. Tubezone 06:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, there are probably dozens or hundreds of people throughout history who have been named Geoffrey Branch, in the same way as there are many people called Susan Graham. My stub describes one of them who was a local axe murderer. Construing it as an attack upon a completely different person is irrational. Secondly, the murder and suicide took place in the 1970s so it's unsurprising that there are few or no internet sources. Newspaper clipping libraries, court records, and coroner's verdicts are the only likely source at present, but I don't have the time to search them at the moment. This is the case with many events from that era. Thirdly, I invite anyone to look at my editing record to decide whether or not I'm a serious editor or a prankster. Nunquam Dormio 19:04, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article has very little detail: it lacks the year he committed suicide, for instance. No implication whatsoever that it is a hoax or attack (I can't see how one could attack a living person by claiming they are a homosexual axe murderer who successfully committed suicide!). But to keep this stub is to invite others to stick in little hoaxes about historical figures. If you have a chance in the future to find the newspaper record of it, the article could be recreated. But Wikipedia is not a memorial, and it is not a police blotter covering every murder. The murder, trial and suicide might have achieved enough notoreity to justify an article, especially in a country less murder prone than some.Edison 19:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have added a reference to his committal (not his suicide or his motive). But I'm in favour of deletion on the basis of lack of notability. That single source is the only one I could find. DrKiernan 14:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as source has now been provided. Again, while Google may be a valuable tool, it is not the be-all and end-all. Material in article establishes some level of notoreity. --Daniel C. Boyer 18:13, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 06:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Relisting as a source (The Times) was added towards the end of the discussion. Sandstein 06:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, most murderers get at least 1 newspaper mention and this article does not say what makes him notable. TJ Spyke 06:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non-notable, fails WP:MURDERER ;) --Steve _(Slf67)^talk 07:43, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There have been countless many murders and murderers in the course of human history. Killing someone does not equal notability. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. -- IslaySolomon | talk 07:44, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. --MECU≈talk 16:25, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE This is a non-notable murderer. There happened to be a double-murder suicide in my home town (Fargo, ND) a few years ago when an ex-husband killed his ex-wife's new boyfriend in his(the BF's) home, then drove to the ex-wife's work to murder her, then turned the shotgun on himself. Big news concidering we might have one murder every 5-10 years? Anyway, it made it to a few big-name papers (small articles though), however the murderer and the event is non-notable...just like Geoffrey is. If he turned out to have been a serial killer, then that would be notable but just murdering someone with an axe is NN (no matter the sexual preferance of the killer). --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 19:20, 7 December 2006 (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.