Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jordan Manners

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 keep/merge. Seems to be a consensus for keeping content but merging to a new article (effectively changing the scope). So editors interested in this topic should probably go ahead and do that, it seems to be supported by consensus. W.marsh 19:27, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jordan Manners

Jordan Manners (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is about the victim of a well-publicized recent murder at C.W. Jefferys Collegiate Institute in Toronto. Murder victims are generally not considered notable unless they were already notable prior to their murder. That is not the case here. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 06:15, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

• Change to weak keep I am the nominator and have changed my opinion about this article. Murder victims are generally not notable unless notable for reasons other than their death. However, as has been suggested below, Jordan Manners was the first person to be killed at a Toronto school, so I'd argue that the article is needed on that basis only. The case has attracted a huge amount of media attention. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 17:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete for now. This is more appropriate for Wikinews, given the recency of the murder. However, murder victims can indeed be notable even if they were completely non-notable before their deaths: Ronald Goldman, Leslie Mahaffy, and Kristen French, have long-term notability in that many people in their home countries would recognize their names 10 years or more after their deaths. --Charlene 06:53, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Look at the Jane Creba article, nobody knew who she was, until she got shot. If you look at the 'Canadian murder victims' category, you will notice that barely any of the victims were notable prior to their killing. School shootings that attract major media attention ARE notable, and this article needs expansion. Blackjays1 07:40, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Couldn't disagree with the above sentiment more. Delete per Charlene. Eusebeus 09:01, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Why? Because it's a Canadian victim? I have NO doubt in my mind that if this were an American victim, nobody would dispute it. NorthernThunder 18:19, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
    • This is more appropriately handled with an article about the incident than with one about Jordan. Bearcat 07:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Regrettably, murder is not necessarily notable. Note that AfD tag had been removed. Restored it. BTLizard 11:35, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. Murder isn't necessarily notable? If a 15 year old kid gets shot at his high school, which goes into lockdown and attracts not only major media attention, but attention from the provincial government (who is pushing for the federal government to ban handguns in Canada after this incident), then you would HAVE to consider this notable! Blackjays1 13:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
• Strong Keep As per BlackJays. Scientz 18:06, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment One would have to have access to the Toronto media to know, but the fact that there is an article on Jane Creba with no nomination for deletion is a big deal. The Toronto media has been claiming that there is racism inherent in the asymmetrical and disproportionate interest paid to death of Jane, a 15 year old white girl, as opposed to the death of Jordan, a 15 year old black boy. I tend to agree. Both are notable, and both should be treated the same way. Either propose Jane's article for deletion as well, or keep this article. Scientz 17:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It has since been removed 2 more times by another anomonous user (the same one both times). Some level of protection may be needed. --70.48.111.55 02:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• Merge into proper article about the shootings (first shooting in Toronto after all) Guycalledryan 08:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• For the record, there was only one person shot, with only one bullet fired. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 17:52, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

• Merge per Guycalledryan. NorthernThunder 18:24, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
• Merge as apropriate Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 22:45, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
• The incident merits an article. The victim doesn't. Merge into an article about the shooting. Bearcat 07:00, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment There's a lot of talk about a merge into an article about the shooting. Which article would that be? The notion is absurd. There is not, and will not be an article about the incident. Do any of you people even know what you're voting about here? Scientz 03:13, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. There was previously an article about the incident. That article became an article about the school C.W. Jefferys Collegiate Institute. So the options left are: 1) To keep this article. 2) To merge it with the school's article. 3) To delete it, which seems unlikely at this point. Blackjays1 03:55, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I mean no disrespect to the dead, but I don't see this article is needed. I am Canadian myself, but what is to be done about murder victims, should they all recieve an article and wikipedia basically become an obituary? 64.231.248.87 06:14, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The way I see it, 'merge to the article on the shooting' should count as an opinion to merge with the school's article, since the article on the shooting was merged with the school's article. Blood Red Sandman ^{(Talk) (Contribs)} 06:26, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

• Merge and you can close the debate(s) now in my opinion. In a ridiculous sequence of events, Wikipedia has had articles on the shooting, the school, the boy killed at the school and even the notable person who the school was named after were each targeted for deletion on specious grounds (eg 'wasn't on Wikipedia current events home page therefore not notable'). I don't think this particular AfD was part of the vexatious series but the article in question was created and then suffered due to the lack of content (the other AfDs weren't properly listed and the best article got "Userfied"). I've taken the best material from the Bio and the Shooting and merged it with the School article. Perhaps the Bio and the Shooting will again re-emerge as stand-alone articles. But why don't we focus on the 1 merged article and stop going in embarassing circles. Canuckle 00:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Again, I have to respectfully disagree. The school isn't notable, the young man who was murdered there is. The young man was also the only victim, which is why the article should be about him and nothing else. This is not just a murder victim. This is the first young person to be killed within a Toronto school. That alone should merit a wiki article and makes him a notable figure. In my opinion, there should be an article for Jordan but not an article for the school or the incident. Scientz 11:30, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. I doubt that this article will remain. After looking at the C.W. Jefferys AfD, it appears that this article will merge with the school's. I have to disagree with you about the school's notability, because the truth is that Jordan Manners, C.W. Jefferys high school, and the incident are all notable now. The incident's article and this article should have been the ones to remain, but somehow it seems that we will be left with an article about the school - which is actually an article about the incident! This is what should happen: Jordan Manners' article remains, and the school's article is renamed to reflect that of the shooting incident. Otherwise, we will be left with a "school" article which is essentially an article about the shooting, the victim, and the suspects. IF that happens, it would be pretty embarassing. Blackjays1 03:45, 6 June 2007 (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.