Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sitting U.S. Vice Presidents who have shot people

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 of the debate was delete, cc to BJAODN. --MarkSweep (call me collect) 19:42, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of sitting U.S. Vice Presidents who have shot people[edit]

This was originally speedy deleted by Bbatsell, but several editors asked for it to be undeleted so they could see it and BJAODN it. Also, there can be a bit of encylopedic merit on the article, if it is cleaned up. By the way, I don't mind if it is speedy deleted again. No vote. Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 05:55, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BJAODN the fake bits, not sure how much value there would be in the rest of the list. --AySz88 ^-^ 05:58, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whichever idiot came up with that page should be beaten with a bunch of bannanas. And then forced to listen to Glen Stephani spelling "bannana". A.J.A. 06:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. BJAODN the whole thing and award Tito a pat on the back for a worthwhile rescue. ENCEPHALON 06:22, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are only two VPs to have shot someone and it would be nice to have a page to discuss the events. Especially considering the Hamilton duel is an often cited American example of courage and honor. Remove the false stuff. Arbustoo 07:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They may cite it that way now that Cheney shot someone, to make him look bad in comparison, but I always remember the story of the duel being viewed negatively. The pride of two men leading to the death of a Cabinet member. It was romanticized to the extent that duelling is often romanticized, but mostly I think it was seen as tragic or discgraceful.--T. Anthony 10:43, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BJAODN --Ter e nc e Ong 08:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha haaaa!!! BJAODN this, it might be another 200 years before a third person qualifies for the list. Grandmasterka 08:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJADON MLA 09:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJADON; Arbustoo, Hamilton-Burr duel already has more than enough on this. Melchoir 10:11, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN- buahahaha! Reyk 10:16, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN Anyway, there is nothing in the article to indicate that either of the two men were sitting down at the time of the shooting. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:19, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as encyclopedic, notable, expandable in the event of further gun-related unpleasantness, verifiable, and ... other stuff. Adrian~enwiki (talk) 10:47, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unless there are other less known examples that can be added. (I could believe Calhoun shot someone, but I don't know he ever did so)--T. Anthony 11:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rewrite Notable events, but 2 entries don't make a good list. Mgm|^(talk) 11:17, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And rename: Shooting incidents involving United States vice presidents? = Mgm|^(talk) 11:18, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Rewrite S iva1979^{Talk to me} 12:08, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I can't believe there are any keep votes, let alone rewrite. There is no material that could belong here instead of Hamilton-Burr duel or Dick Cheney hunting incident. The only reason I haven't edited the article to mention Hamilton-Burr duel and Dick Cheney hunting incident is that it's a joke being preserved for BJAODN, where it should already be. Melchoir 12:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN, isnt worth having a list with only two examples. already mentioned at Vice President of the United States -- Astrokey44|talk 14:38, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- BJOADN Comment I think that the size of the list is a strong contributor to the joke's value. MLA 15:02, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN, although the J and D are all that really apply, as it was funny, clever (althought entirely unencyclopedic), and not nonsense. youngamerican (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN. Entertaining, but not really the sort of thing most people would need a reference for.--Elkman 17:00, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN until a 3rd VP shoots someone. Then you'd have a list! It made me laugh though.--Isotope23 17:12, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
bjaodn this for now please unless there is third one Yuckfoo 19:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Two categories for this "information" are already listed on CfD. This "list" isn't any better. Pavel Vozenilek 19:41, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep HasNoClue 19:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Avi 21:40, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete of course; the similar categories (now up to 3 of them) are up for deletion as well. Carlossuarez46 22:56, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's a BJAODN, obviously. Stifle 23:57, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete: The tragedy is this article is a sympton of how Americans care more about what their political leaders do as private citizens/celebrities than they do about how they do their jobs. If not delete, the sensible thing would be merge with a trivia section under Vice President of the United States. Peter Grey 04:56, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This does not qualify as a speedy delete. Wikipedia has specific rules about that. Turnstep 14:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the article, and the categories. Turnstep 14:41, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
BJAODN Well, I found it amusing at least... I thought it was gonna be partisan junk but it's clearly intended as pure humor. --W.marsh 15:30, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article, merge anything useful to Vice Presidents .... Perhaps there was something funny in earlier edits, but now its only two entries (useless as a list). --William Allen Simpson 07:09, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The funny edit was this one, for future reference. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 22:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Humour is so difficult to categorise - I strongly disagree with Tito's comment and think that it's the two entries version that has comedy value. MLA 09:44, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - We could BJAODN both versions, I guess. Melchoir 11:03, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      - So long as we don't BJADON the newly expanded version which wouldn't qualify under the J. MLA 10:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Make into category and delete.Septentrionalis 04:21, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - too little real material to make into either a list or a category. — Kimchi.sg | Talk 11:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ Weak Keep - who cares?- ~~Puss'nPurpleBoots 19:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)~~ - Puss'nPurpleBoots 00:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- I expanded the article.

Are these events notable in and of themselves?

Well, the Burr-Hamilton incident happened 202 years ago, and it is still being talked about today. So, I would say that is a big yes.

Under what circumstances would this topic come up for discussion? I wouldn't even try to guess.-Puss'nPurpleBoots 22:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The wikipedia has an article on Dan Quayle's famous misspelling -- potatoe. Is that more important than Cheney shooting a guy, and then delaying the arrival of the Police long enough that his blood alcohol level would have returned to normal if he had been drinking?

Various other contributors have argued here that there shouldn't be a list because only two VPOTUS have shot people. Actually though these are the only VPOTUS shooting incidents that are well known. I have an open mind as to the possibility that there were other incidents which aren't well known. I am sure I am not the only one who wonders how many known incidents there have been. The proper place for that info is not the Dick Cheney article or the Aaron Burr article. -- Geo Swan 20:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you trying to make a point for keeping this article or are you soliciting information?-Puss'nPurpleBoots 22:16, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(1) I think the article should be kept. (2) I would like to know if there were more than the two incidents. -- Geo Swan 15:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I have a brilliant idea! I'll start a List of U.S. Republican Presidents named "George Bush". Sure, there are only two entries, but maybe someday there will be more! And maybe there have been Bushes in the past that I don't know about! Melchoir 22:25, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that is a brilliant idea. I think it is a disrespectful attempt at sarcastic mockery. Did you even read my rewrite of the article? I did you the courtesy to take your contributions seriously. I strongly urge you to show the same courtesy to other wikipedia contributors.
The question of whether other sitting VPOTUS shot people is not a ridiculous one. Duelling used to be popular. Lincoln was the first POTUS to have a security detail. It is quite possible that earlier VPOTUS engaged in duels that weren't publicized, maybe because no one died. Most duels were not fatal. -- Geo Swan 15:23, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If it was funny in earlier versions, its not now. Too boring and unnotable to keep. Can be re-created if and when US VPs start shooting people regularly, which may not be as far off as we think. Herostratus 17:41, 22 February 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.