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 merge to North Thurston High School. There is a rough consensus here that this does not merit a separate article. There is not a clear consensus between whether to merge or delete, but the argument for a very selective merge seems to be getting the best of the discussion and so am defaulting to that. Davewild (talk) 16:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

North Thurston High School Shooting (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm completing this nomination for Cyanidethistles, who did not add a deletion rationale. Upon looking at the article this appears to be a non-notable school shooting. A search for sources didn't produce anything to show otherwise. The teacher is a hero, but I just don't see where this passes notability guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:12, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge/redirect - to North Thurston High School. It's notable enough for that article and it's also a search term people might use. Instead of doing the AfD, I think you can just WP:BEBOLD and do the merge and redirect yourself? (I don't see any way the school shooting article will survive this AfD) —Мандичка^YO 😜 04:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem with that is that it's sort of a WP:ONEEVENT sort of deal. Someone attempted to have a suicide by cop but was foiled before anyone was hurt. It's not really all that major of an event when you get down to it so I don't know that it'd be all that notable to include in the school's page, to be honest. If someone had gotten hurt then maybe it'd be worth including, but this was just a case where someone fired a gun without hitting anyone, a teacher nobly stepped in to stop them, and the person was taken off to jail. The teacher is a hero, but this is sort of a routine 1E sort of deal- I don't see where it really needs to be included anywhere. The coverage just isn't that in depth, was only covered for a few days, and was mostly covered by local sources. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• For example, when I was in school someone did something somewhat similar. Someone made repeated bomb threats and at one point actually planted something that looked like a bomb in the school. It got us out of school on a repeated basis since the police had to continually sweep the school and it gained some coverage from the news, but years and years later it's not even a footnote in the school's history. I kind of see this becoming a similar type of deal- nobody was hurt, the person was caught, and a few days later the media moved on to something else. 05:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

• Granted, 1E is oriented towards people but I think that it still fits this in general. I just don't see where this really merits a mention on Wikipedia at all. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:32, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  It's notable as it received significant coverage, and high school shootings are a significantly notable event in the history of a high school. This was not a false alarm where someone claimed to have a gun. A student had a loaded gun and fired it, twice, before a teacher risked his own life and tackled him. There will be follow up coverage when the student is prosecuted and when they discuss how to prevent other students from bringing loaded weapons (and who knows what will happen with the teacher, but he'll probably win U.S. Teacher of the Year or something). It's not often a high school makes national headlines, but when it does, the reason it made national headlines will probably be a significant moment in the school's history. —Мандичка^YO 😜 06:08, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• It's not really a guarantee that this incident will continue to gain coverage and that the coverage stopped only a few days after it was initially reported doesn't really indicate a lot of long term notability. Saying that there is guaranteed long term coverage and long term repercussions is pretty much just WP:SPECULATION at this point. We have to judge notability in the here and now, and I just don't see where this event is major enough to be included anywhere at this point in time. If/when more coverage does come about then it can be addressed then- but right now all we have is a near miss that got coverage for a few days towards the end of April and hasn't been the focus of a lot of in-depth media coverage since then. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:47, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Most of the coverage spanned April 28th and 29th, after which point it dropped off to almost entirely local papers. I just don't see where this really merits a mention in here at this point in time. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree that it's notable, but I hate to have a high school's page dominated by this sort of incident. Since it is now clear that coverage is ongoing and substantive, I think a page on the incident works better than filling the school's page with the details.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:38, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete because it's an unnotable crime and Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Unless the perp was a student of that school, I wouldn't merge either. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:18, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• He is/was, but he was a recent transfer. I still don't know that this would really be something to merge into the article, given that the coverage for this was done over a fairly short period of time and all things considered, the coverage isn't really all that heavy. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Just another failed school shooting that was fortunately thwarted before anything real could happen. Libertarian12111971 (talk) 21:42, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• "Just another school shooting with a few deaths, nothing to see here. Move along." Cue Daily Mail comments about how the US is so horrible, should ban guns etc. 50.135.249.113 (talk) 18:24, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Probable keep Probably passes WP:GNG but simply lacks sourcing. I'm going to look at how much coverage it got. will be working on the article for a day or 2, on a time available basis. have put up a construction tag.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:29, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• 'update further legal proceedings have been postponed by judge until September or later, as defense gathers material. student had transferred form another school from which he had been expelled following trial and sentencing for groping female classmates. Notable heroism of the civics teacher, a veteran who efficiently tackled and held the shooter before police officer on the scene could get a clear shot. I do think that there is already sufficient coverage to keep under WP:GNG; there will undoubtedly be ongoing coverage of trial. School shootings are a topic of considerable interest, as evidenced by nationwide coverage of this one.E.M.Gregory (talk) 22:11, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Merge maybe one sentence to North Thurston High School, delete the rest. I would not oppose deletion of the whole thing, without a merge. As things go today this was an utterly trivial incident. A student fired two shots, no one was hurt, the teacher was honored. End of story. --MelanieN (talk) 23:06, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• My concern is that right now we have something that happened, nobody was hurt, and the coverage was pretty minimal when you get down to it. There was a flurry of coverage on April 28/29th, then this essentially dropped off the radar. There were a handful of articles on May 11th from local sources then this again dropped off the radar. Since we can't guarantee that the trial (when it happens) will gain coverage, this doesn't really seem to be an overwhelmingly notable incident as far as Wikipedia is concerned. I still don't think that this really merits being merged into the school's page since it really didn't gain that much coverage. We've got to think of it this way: will this really be worth having in the article 2-5 years from now? Considering the fairly minimal coverage, I don't know that it really would. There's also WP:NOTNEWS to think about. Just because something received a little coverage doesn't mean that it automatically merits inclusion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:12, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I kind of have to compare this to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephen Charlie's prostitution of a child, where there was a lot more coverage on a global scale and the page was still deleted. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:DDH We have here a reliably sourced article on an incident that drew national attention because school shootings do draw national attention. This one had 2 aspects that will continue to be of interest in the debates on availability of guns, training and arming of police officer, and school security procedures as it relates to admission policies. The fact that the shooter was taken down by a teacher who had served in the soldier and therefore knew how to take a man down and immobilize him. And the fact that the shooter was a transfer student expelled from a nearby school for prior convictions. The information on the page is useful, it happened, it was widely covered. Frankly, I fail to see the advantage to anyone in taking the page down.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:51, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Selective Merge to North Thurston High School. The event received national attention for a day or two in April and got some follow up coverage later in May. Additionally, there is a news article indicating that legislation was introduced in the Washington State Senate as a result of the attack. The attack was not notable enough for an article. However, its unusual enough and got enough coverage to justify a very brief (perhaps just a sentence long) mention in the high school article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:44, 12 June 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.