Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cory Maye
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result of the debate was keep (nomination withdrawn). howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 01:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Corey Maye
This is a non-notable person. The article was apparently created and is maintained by several bloggers, and links to no other articles in en.wiki. NoSeptember talk 19:34, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep this case is having a far reaching effect, I'd usually say delete, but this is much more notable [1]. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 19:36, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- The article as I found it had his name misspelled and his birth date off by 2 years. Thanks to Encyclopedist for catching these errors and correcting them. If we keep this article, then we certainly need to continue to clean it up. Currently it seems to be sourced from a single blog and that blog has not been very precise with factual details. NoSeptember talk 20:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Clean it up!? Well there is a novel idea... almost makes me wish we had posted it to a forum that allows that to happen in an open manner. If it is deleted no more than 3 days after it is posted in the first place where is the collaboration to come from? Do you understand what the strength of an interactive and user managed Wiki is?
- The article as I found it had his name misspelled and his birth date off by 2 years. Thanks to Encyclopedist for catching these errors and correcting them. If we keep this article, then we certainly need to continue to clean it up. Currently it seems to be sourced from a single blog and that blog has not been very precise with factual details. NoSeptember talk 20:40, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep as per Encyclopedist. Meelar (talk) 20:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep! Non-notable? The guy is to be put to death, he was not even supposed to be arrested. The original "raid" lacks physical documentation. This is VERY pertinent.
- Keep as this issue is being followed across the blogosphere.
- Seems like a keeper to me also --Censorwolf 20:18, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep it should be in the news. It's not. Please don't censor it from here as well.
- This deserves explanation: Corey Maye is a prisoner on death row in Mississippi. Police officers entered his apartment on a search warrant. He shot and killed one officer. He had no criminal record prior to this event. The police found one joint and/or trace amounts of marijuana in the residence. There was no other associated crime. Maye claims he was sleeping when the police entered and that he fired in self-defense, unaware that the man approaching him was a police officer. His defense attorney had never handled a capital case before. Maye is black and the officer was white. He's garnered some attention in the liberal blogosphere (which isn't encyclopedic, unfortunately). Two legitimate news outlets have covered the story: a local newspaper and the local NBC television affiliate. I checked the websites for Amnesty International and the NAACP: neither site returns any results for his name. After some hard thought I'm voting keep. Two mainstream news sources is enough. This has encyclopedic interest as an example of the United States death penalty system. Durova 21:00, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Having an explanation was a good idea. People need to realize that a blog is not necessarily a good or credible news source. I expect most of the unsigned comments on this page came here from the blogs. There are literally millions of people in prison and many if not most assert their innocence. Being imprisoned and claiming innocence is not enough to be a notable person. As noted in the nomination, this is a stand alone article linked to nothing else, most likely created by a blogger who desired an article on this person. There seems to be some interest in the case, which is fine by me, but that is a case by case thing. Being on Death Row does not make one automatically notable. NoSeptember talk 21:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment This looks like an unusual case. I gather that this became eligible for the death penalty because the court found that the shooting occurred in the commission of a crime. This logic normally applies to armed robberies, not misdemeanor drug possession. While I'm no legal expert this certainly piques my interest. So does the defendant's lack of any prior criminal record. Durova
- Keep It's a capital murder case because the prosecution says Maye knew Jones was a cop. Killing a cop is worse than killing a mere "civilian", you know. Anton 02:21, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment This looks like an unusual case. I gather that this became eligible for the death penalty because the court found that the shooting occurred in the commission of a crime. This logic normally applies to armed robberies, not misdemeanor drug possession. While I'm no legal expert this certainly piques my interest. So does the defendant's lack of any prior criminal record. Durova
- Having an explanation was a good idea. People need to realize that a blog is not necessarily a good or credible news source. I expect most of the unsigned comments on this page came here from the blogs. There are literally millions of people in prison and many if not most assert their innocence. Being imprisoned and claiming innocence is not enough to be a notable person. As noted in the nomination, this is a stand alone article linked to nothing else, most likely created by a blogger who desired an article on this person. There seems to be some interest in the case, which is fine by me, but that is a case by case thing. Being on Death Row does not make one automatically notable. NoSeptember talk 21:27, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep While the story is developing and not all the facts are fully known yet, I don't think this is non-notable. --Error28 21:32, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, I've heard about this person many times before seeing his page on wikipedia. Definitely notable. Strong keep. --Pierremenard
- Keep While merely saying "he should be in the news and he's not" is not a reason to keep an article (I'm glad to see that our recent policy change has um, encouraged, more people to actually open user accounts, the new people need to realize what arguments they need to use, and not use, in deletion votes. This will be instructive). I believe this case is arousing national interest in the U.S. and will eventually be covered by the major media. I know we don't consider blog posts to be serious sources (a policy I think deserves more nuance) but the fact here is that an awful lot of bloggers, people who usually don't agree on much, are picking this case up and drawing attention to it. There is a website devoted to it which has nothing to do with the blog. Eventually the media we consider reliable sources will do stories. I'd rather have the article now than recreate it later. Daniel Case 22:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: "links to no other articles in en.wiki." Huh? Within hours of the article being added, I spent one myself slavishly going through and linking where necessary. I have since dabbed a bunch. At the time this AfD was posted, there were plenty of links to other articles. I cannot see how I can assume good faith here, given that the many links in the article were present at the time and could not have been missed. I think that argues even more strongly for a keep. Daniel Case 22:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- I was referring to other articles that linked to the Corey Maye article (click on "What links here" to see what links to the article). In other words, there are no incoming links, you added plenty of outgoing links. Please don't let your "good faith cushion" run so thin. ;) NoSeptember talk 22:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: "links to no other articles in en.wiki." Huh? Within hours of the article being added, I spent one myself slavishly going through and linking where necessary. I have since dabbed a bunch. At the time this AfD was posted, there were plenty of links to other articles. I cannot see how I can assume good faith here, given that the many links in the article were present at the time and could not have been missed. I think that argues even more strongly for a keep. Daniel Case 22:28, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Maye himself is not notable, but then that's partly the point: the guy had no criminal record yet is slated for death after a murder that might have been a justifiable killing. This story has legs, and since when should wiki just follow the MSM? -Leonard 22:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Non-notables have a way of becoming notables. Look at Justice Roberts. Leonson 23:22, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Did you write that knowing that I was the person who created the John Roberts article? :) NoSeptember talk 23:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep Maye's case IS notable. This is a wrongful conviction that needs to be corrected. This NEEDS to be in the news, and the only way that will happen is if the word is con
- Comment I think NoSeptember should withdraw this nomination per obviousness. Speedy keep εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 23:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thats fine by me. I withdraw my AfD nomination and request a Speedy Keep. To those of you who registered just to vote, I encourage you to look around for articles in your area of interest and help edit and improve them, they are easy to find. NoSeptember talk 00:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
- 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.
