Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wayne Chiang

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 was closed as Merge content per WP:SNOW, My own vote discounted. Deletion appears to be a close second, but I'm pretty sure the people who voted delete for this article wont mind a redirect to Virginia Tech massacre in its place.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 19:27, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wayne Chiang

Wayne Chiang (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A contested speedy. Apparently, he has been mistaken by some (who, is not clear) as the killer of the Virginia Tech massacre. IMO, having some (as opposed to "a lot") of media coverage by mistake is generally not an assertion of notability. I don't think this should be even merged into the main article. Tizio 17:34, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

  • Merge - Subject is sourced, but may not meet the criteria of inclusion as a independent article. AQu01rius (User • Talk) 17:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge a paragraph at most to the main VT massacre article and redirect. —Resurgent insurgent 2007-04-18 17:59Z
  • Merge per Resurgent. This has been reported but it barely seems notable, just one of several rumors that first day. There's no evidence the police considered him a suspect at any time. He actually held off his denial so that he could rake in cash via AdSense, for Pete's sake.[1] --Dhartung | Talk 18:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
    • From what I understand, though, he intended to donate that cash to charity. —Lowellian (reply) 02:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into Inaccurate media reports of the Virginia Tech massacre, if that article survives its AfD. Otherwise, merge into Virginia Tech massacre. Article is very short and this person is only notable for the VT massacre. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:57, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Borderline notability based solely on first day rumor-mongering and, frankly, racial profiling. Wl219 21:03, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Being briefly and falsely named as a spree killer does not confer encyclopedic notability to satisfy WP:BIO even ifthe name appeared in a few newspapers for a brief while. There was another name bandied about in Wikipedia which was removed by oversight with all traces erased. This article deserves the same fate. See the essay WP:NOTNEWS for more discussion of how not everything that is in the news belongs in an encyclopedia. Edison 22:27, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment in support of Edison, the essay to which he refers is in support of WP:N footnote 3, which clarifies the meaning of multiple sources as not being independent journals repeating the same minor news event, though wire services or otherwise. --Kevin Murray 22:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Per Edison. This is an intersting but obscure aspect of the tragedy and should properly be included in that main article. --Kevin Murray 22:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom
  • Merge --Ksyrie 23:18, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Update --Kageskull 21:48, 18 April 2007 (EST) I wanted to give a reason not to delete this article. This fella was dealt an incredible injustice by being branded the shooter by members of the tabloid media. Keeping this article, and its citations, can give a point of reference to help this fella out. I agree it shouldn't overshadow this tragedy, but perhaps it could bring to light the consequences of media personalities who propagate misinformation without checking out their sources.
  • Keep. I suspect that Wikipedia will soon have articles for many of the victims, and Chiang is a different sort of victim of the shootings. Wikipedia kept articles like Richard Jewell and Jean Charles de Menezes; now certainly, what happened to Jewell and Menezes was a lot worse than what happened to Chiang, but the parallel holds in that they were people falsely regarded as being perpetrators of a major crime. —Lowellian (reply) 02:09, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete* Has anyone thought about the ethics of putting this man up for the world to see? He has been given the right to assert his innocence using his own voice - who are we to determine that his name will be associated with the massacre for years to come? He may want to affirm his innocence and then return to relative obscurity. --SianMycock 02:15, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, there's nothing to merge to the massacre page that isn't already over there.--Cúchullain t/c 02:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge--keep the essential details in the main VT Massacre article Marieblasdell 03:27, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete/Merge ~ Rollo44 03:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep simply because thee will be multiple news stories about him, some for the reason that this is different from the stories about those murdered, and does not have a personally tragic ending. There will be time to merge if it seems appropriate later. I am a little puzzled by all the attempts to immediate delete articles at a time when judgment is not yet reliable. WP did a remarkably good job of covering the story because of the large number of contributors available, and the inherent advantages of a wiki in dealing with multiple people contributing small amounts. That's not WPs primary purpose, but we should hardly be ashamed of being able to do it, and to rush to remove what we were able to build. These reactions of the people here are an interesting response to the tragedy and probably worth analyzing, but that's another matter.DGG 03:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, but not immediately Keep it up for a few weeks, as it's a notable part of a currently international incident. People browsing Wikipedia, reading up on the massacre, looking for all facts, will be glad to see it. I was, just right now. As the event fades into a more historical context, it will become less notable, and should be deleted. I'd certainly merge into the main article the quote of his though, with reference.--Recoil42 04:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge There are details here not in the main article. They should be integrated in, Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk/cont) 04:28, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge This article doesn't have enough information to constitute an article of its own. BlueStarz 05:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete all this information can be said within the main article. It's ridiculous that just because his name was mentioned that he has an entire article devoted to him? Zodiiak 05:48, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable. Just a case of mistaken identity. Yaf 06:06, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Same reason. D4S 19:25, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep There was a lot of news coverage on this person before it was revealed who the real shooter was. His journal topped the Drudge Report for a couple of days. --Oakshade 09:02, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to an article about people related to this event.--142.227.165.2 12:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Edison and nom. Jauerback 13:07, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • I suggest that all editors take a look at Inaccurate media reports of the Virginia Tech massacre and reconsider their opinions in light of that. Uncle G 14:44, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - The article should be kept, because in a couple of weeks it will be the only way for someone to find neutral information, or information at all about him, confirming he's innocent.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.209.239.66 (talk • contribs) 14:44, 19 April 2007
  • Move to Wikinews, merge with Va Tech Massacre page. --205.201.141.146 15:58, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
    AFIK, we cannot move this page to WikiNews because of license incompatibility. Tizio 16:11, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • merge with that inaccuracy pageSYSS Mouse 16:43, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete; Chiang's role is peripheral to the event itself at best, but moreover inconsequential to the event. As I feel that the Inaccuracy article also should be deleted, my views are further substantiated from there. This article violates WP:N. --Mhking 20:49, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with inaccuracy page. Ford MF 23:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Deserved little more than half a paragraph in the build up to finding out who the real murderer was. I am sure this guy doesn't want his 10 minutes fame from this, lets us not give it him -- Jimmi Hugh 00:48, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
    • Exactly. So you're basically requesting a merge, in which relevant text is moved to the main article. -Phoenix 00:59, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
      • No... he already has mention, a merge insinuates more additions. The idea that we would scrub the information from wikipedia is absurd, so obviously i beleive the main article should contain this point. --Jimmi Hugh 01:46, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into media innacuracies article.  ALKIVAR™ ☢ 04:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge He wasn't a central part of the VTech massacre, but he was a victim of the media, and a statement clearing his name should be included somewhere. Robin Chen 05:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete Mr Chiang was a hoax victim, unless he plays a major role in the massacre, it's not a keep. --24.225.185.101 05:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete / redirect to VTech massacre article - Non-notable subject, the single notable thing about him can be mentioned in the main VA Tech massacre article or the Inaccuracies article if it survives AfD. AvB ÷ talk 12:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete His involuntary involvement with the massacre is hardly noteworthy enough for an individual article on him. At best he's worth a brief mention in the main article. Otherwise, people need to go through every murder case on Wikipedia and cite every suspect the police/media had before coming to their actual conclusion. And then make an article about each of them. Ludicrous. Mentality 15:20, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with inaccuracies. 132.205.44.134 16:38, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong delete - Good Lord, this isn't worth anything. --David Shankbone 19:54, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect Most of this info is already at Virginia Tech Massacre, just redirect it there. Kntrabssi 02:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge with the media inaccuracies. Alone, he isn't notable enough for his own article. I Love Pi 02:59, 21 April 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.