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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin closure.
Safiel (
talk) 07:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep, redirect with history or merge - The incident is prominent enough that it should be either kept, redirected with history, or merged into
Planned_Parenthood#2015_attack. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 05:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
If
this tweet and
this article is accurate, then it being apart of the Planned Parenthood article would be inappropriate, because it would make it NOT the target, just a location. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 05:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Not accurate, however, as a careful reading of the Townhall piece as updated shows. Tvoz/
talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Except current facts state that the shooting had nothing to do with Planned Parenthood itself, but rather it was the place the shooter ducked for cover after a robbery gone wrong at the Chase Bank. This would be dishonest and go against sources. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 06:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Reply - Then someone had better update the article to mention
Chase Bank. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 06:16, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Really? Well, blame the articles at the time; they never mentioned such a thing.
75.80.175.107 (
talk) 06:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Those were not "current facts". Tvoz/
talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Noteworthy, and still a current event. I think the title should associate it with PP though, if only to differentiate it from other mass shootings in Colorado Springs this year (e.g., Oct 31).
Poindexter Propellerhead (
talk) 05:54, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Again, it has nothing to do with PP itself, according to sources at the moment, and it would be misleading. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 06:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Agree with Poindexter et al. The tweet cited above as evidence was early and shown to be untrue - he was inside Planned Parenthood. And the Townhall piece, also largely based on unconfirmed tweets, clearly says in comments attributed to the police spokeswoman, not tweeters, that while motive is not yet determined, the event started and ended at PP. The Chase Bank claim was an early unconfirmed report that was discounted later on. Tvoz/
talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Speedy Keep Wikipedia policies should not be taken to obvious absurdity. It would be wise to withdraw this nomination. --
I am One of Many (
talk) 06:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Please give this at least a week - there is likely to be a political connection between protests outside the clinic and the shooting in the clinic. This is almost certainly set to have significant political ramifications for Planned Parenthood and the abortion debate in the United States. --
Callinus (
talk) 07:02, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Speedy Keep - Noteworthy and newsworthy.
WP:BREAKING would advise waiting a little longer, but there's
quite a lot of news coverage on it right now that I don't think we need to wait for more evidence of notability.
GabeIglesia (
talk) 07:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nomination Withdrawn as it's
WP:SNOW-y. Will revisit soon if lasting notability doesn't present itself. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 07:39, 28 November 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.
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 withdrawn by nominator. Non-admin closure.
Safiel (
talk) 07:45, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep, redirect with history or merge - The incident is prominent enough that it should be either kept, redirected with history, or merged into
Planned_Parenthood#2015_attack. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 05:33, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
If
this tweet and
this article is accurate, then it being apart of the Planned Parenthood article would be inappropriate, because it would make it NOT the target, just a location. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 05:44, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Not accurate, however, as a careful reading of the Townhall piece as updated shows. Tvoz/
talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Except current facts state that the shooting had nothing to do with Planned Parenthood itself, but rather it was the place the shooter ducked for cover after a robbery gone wrong at the Chase Bank. This would be dishonest and go against sources. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 06:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Reply - Then someone had better update the article to mention
Chase Bank. --
Jax 0677 (
talk) 06:16, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Really? Well, blame the articles at the time; they never mentioned such a thing.
75.80.175.107 (
talk) 06:25, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Those were not "current facts". Tvoz/
talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Noteworthy, and still a current event. I think the title should associate it with PP though, if only to differentiate it from other mass shootings in Colorado Springs this year (e.g., Oct 31).
Poindexter Propellerhead (
talk) 05:54, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Again, it has nothing to do with PP itself, according to sources at the moment, and it would be misleading. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 06:03, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Agree with Poindexter et al. The tweet cited above as evidence was early and shown to be untrue - he was inside Planned Parenthood. And the Townhall piece, also largely based on unconfirmed tweets, clearly says in comments attributed to the police spokeswoman, not tweeters, that while motive is not yet determined, the event started and ended at PP. The Chase Bank claim was an early unconfirmed report that was discounted later on. Tvoz/
talk 06:20, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Speedy Keep Wikipedia policies should not be taken to obvious absurdity. It would be wise to withdraw this nomination. --
I am One of Many (
talk) 06:57, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep Please give this at least a week - there is likely to be a political connection between protests outside the clinic and the shooting in the clinic. This is almost certainly set to have significant political ramifications for Planned Parenthood and the abortion debate in the United States. --
Callinus (
talk) 07:02, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Speedy Keep - Noteworthy and newsworthy.
WP:BREAKING would advise waiting a little longer, but there's
quite a lot of news coverage on it right now that I don't think we need to wait for more evidence of notability.
GabeIglesia (
talk) 07:09, 28 November 2015 (UTC)reply
Nomination Withdrawn as it's
WP:SNOW-y. Will revisit soon if lasting notability doesn't present itself. TrueCRaysball | #RaysUp 07:39, 28 November 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.