Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lareal Watt

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. Courcelles (talk) 22:31, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lareal Watt[edit]

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

Individual notable for only one event, not passing WP:BLP1E. Initial contributor, Philmonte101, is definitely a good-faith editor and I would request that all input be positive and constructive. --Non-Dropframe _talk 21:57, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep My opinion is that the article should be kept. I think the subject is interesting and there are 3 references; I could really do more references to arrest archives. Is it even possible to keep the article? The research I did was honestly simple, since there are little resources out there. I feel like Wikipedia is a sum of research, and this is definitely the sum of my research on the knucklehead. Philmonte101 (talk) 22:03, 7 October 2015 (UTC)--Formatting to standard AfD !vote structure. --Non-Dropframe _talk 22:06, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete - I seriously considered adding {{db-attack}} to the page and would endorse others if they do the same. Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia of criminals. Yes, we have notorious criminals and we have people who were notable in their own right before before committing crimes but the vast majority of criminals fail WP:N. When it comes to determining the notability of a criminal, the kinds of sources matter: Those which routinely report all crimes of a given type or all crimes in a given geographic location or all crimes which fit a certain profile are generally treated much the same way as "business directory listings" are - they don't carry much weight. There is also WP:ONEEVENT, which generally means criminals who have only received press coverage for a single crime or crime spree don't qualify for their own article, but the underlying crime or crime spree might if it met Wikipedia's notability guidelines. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 04:15, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete as well. The subject definitely fails WP:CRIME. Borderline WP:CSD#G10. Having this article makes me seriously uncomfortable. –Grondemar 04:37, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Carolina-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:14, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:14, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 11:14, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Violates WP:BLPCRIME and is a borderline attack page. This is basically a biography of one arrest of interest to the local news media. Even if this person is convicted, the alleged crime is fairly ordinary. • Gene93k (talk) 11:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Violation of WP:BLPCRIME, which can be overridden in the case of an incident that becomes notorious. this didn't.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:01, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BLPCRIME, Probably not as bad as the weird shite you see on mens toilet doors here in the UK!. –Davey2010^Talk 21:57, 13 October 2015 (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.