Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiernan Tague incident

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. Consensus that WP:NEVENT not satisfied. Goldsztajn (talk) 03:13, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kiernan Tague incident

edit

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Kiernan Tague incident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Deproded. Not notable. Does not pass any aspect of WP:NEVENT. Also BLPCRIME issues. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:16, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete on the whole as it has turned out there was not lasting significance given the mother was not in fact charged. Strong keep-- passes the "lasting coverage" criterion of the event notability policy as the precedent this case sets will have a lasting impact on law. Well-sourced and cites a number of reliable, independent sources providing significant coverage. The only reason to delete it would be to claim that it was routine and completely unimportant, but given the sources discuss precedent, this is not the case. Mrfoogles (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And I don't see WP:BLPCRIME issues -- he has pled guilty to vehicular manslaughter, and the article only says he was being accused of 2nd-degree murder (which needs to be updated, though). The article is about the crime, so saying it should not mention the crime is not applicable. Mrfoogles (talk) 04:28, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The entire claim to notability is based on the mother. There is nothing notable about drunk driving. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Mrfoogles Are we looking at the same article? This is an article on someone who hasn't been convicted of a crime that has virtually no coverage to sustain WP:LASTING.
There was no precedent because she didn't even end up being charged! That was the conclusion! There is no precedent. All of the sourcing is primary, as it does not reflect or do any of its own analysis, it is just Thing Happened PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:30, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fundamentally this is a car crash that made the local and tabloid news for a few days. The only update is them saying they would not charge the mother. PARAKANYAA (talk) 04:37, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I will admit did not notice that part. I kind of want to keep it just because it is so well-sourced, but given there does not seem to have been lasting significance I'll probably strike my vote. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:25, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is not really "well-sourced". PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:31, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think there was a reasonable idea there might have been lasting significance when the article was created -- only we now know there has not been lasting significance. Mrfoogles (talk) 05:29, 18 March 2025 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kiernan_Tague_incident&oldid=1282224804"