Misplaced Pages

:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Luigi Mangione: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 18:08, 14 December 2024 editLocke Cole (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers18,894 edits →Draft:Luigi Mangione: ReplyTag: Reply← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:01, 16 December 2024 edit undoLaunchballer (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors35,772 edits →Draft:Luigi Mangione: Closed as snow keep (XFDcloser) 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion|{{mfd top collapse|1=''']'''}}|}}<div class="boilerplate mfd vfd xfd-closed mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: #E3D2FB; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
__NOINDEX__
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to nominate a miscellany page for deletion, you must manually edit the MfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result of the discussion was: '''snow keep'''. Voters are invited to chime in at ]. <small>]</small> <span style="background:#FF0;font-family:Rockwell Extra Bold">]]]</span> 21:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
====]==== ====]====
:{{pagelinks|1=Draft:Luigi Mangione}}<includeonly> – (])</includeonly>&#8203; :{{pagelinks|1=Draft:Luigi Mangione}}<includeonly> – (])</includeonly>&#8203;
Line 35: Line 42:
::I mean.... vote how you want, but it's pretty silly to vote "snow keep" when there's six people voting to delete, and you're the second one to vote keep. ] (]) 13:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC) ::I mean.... vote how you want, but it's pretty silly to vote "snow keep" when there's six people voting to delete, and you're the second one to vote keep. ] (]) 13:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Mostly did it as an ironic vote to counteract the “SNOW delete” !vote only six hours into the discussion. —] • ] • ] 04:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC) :::Mostly did it as an ironic vote to counteract the “SNOW delete” !vote only six hours into the discussion. —] • ] • ] 04:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
::::…which was a proper SNOW, as nobody had voted keep prior. ]<sub>]</sub><sup>]</sup> 19:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
:::::Anyone closing a discussion with only a handful of !votes after just a few hours as “snow” is begging to have a visit to DRV. Nothing proper about it. —] • ] • ] 22:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
* '''Keep, and mainspace'''. Well sourced, and subject to an avalanche of new coverage. Do not redirect to ] boldly, but do propose doing so on the talk page; I predict that the page will be decided to pass ]. The page has no BLP violations that justify deletion in any namespace. —] (]) 20:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC) * '''Keep, and mainspace'''. Well sourced, and subject to an avalanche of new coverage. Do not redirect to ] boldly, but do propose doing so on the talk page; I predict that the page will be decided to pass ]. The page has no BLP violations that justify deletion in any namespace. —] (]) 20:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. I would have argued a delete prior to him being charge but now that he has been charged it's clear that Mangione ''could'' be notable by himself. This is not an endorsement to move the page to main space, to be clear. It's not a BLP violation because the person has been named publicly by the media and the draft does not say he has committed a crime. ] (]) 21:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC) *'''Keep'''. I would have argued a delete prior to him being charge but now that he has been charged it's clear that Mangione ''could'' be notable by himself. This is not an endorsement to move the page to main space, to be clear. It's not a BLP violation because the person has been named publicly by the media and the draft does not say he has committed a crime. ] (]) 21:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Line 48: Line 57:
*'''Keep''' the draft. I'm not sure that Luigi Mangione is notable enough for a separate page yet (even though I think he will be soon), but that doesn't mean the draft needs to be deleted. It should stay in draftspace where it can be worked on until notability is demonstrated imo. ] (]) 10:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC) *'''Keep''' the draft. I'm not sure that Luigi Mangione is notable enough for a separate page yet (even though I think he will be soon), but that doesn't mean the draft needs to be deleted. It should stay in draftspace where it can be worked on until notability is demonstrated imo. ] (]) 10:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Didn't think people would want to delete a draft, but no matter, I think this would apply to a mainspace article. He has achieved notoriety/fame beyond ] for it to be applicable. Discussions in sources have moved on to his celebrity/folk hero status - , which suggests he has individual notability. A jury may or may not convict him, innocent or guilty, it would not matter as to his notability. ] also allows for an article like this (see criterion #3), so it is a moot point. ] (]) 10:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC) *'''Keep''' Didn't think people would want to delete a draft, but no matter, I think this would apply to a mainspace article. He has achieved notoriety/fame beyond ] for it to be applicable. Discussions in sources have moved on to his celebrity/folk hero status - , which suggests he has individual notability. A jury may or may not convict him, innocent or guilty, it would not matter as to his notability. ] also allows for an article like this (see criterion #3), so it is a moot point. ] (]) 10:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' as Luigi Mangione is a very notable person at the moment and could very easily become subject of an article whether he is guilty or not guilty later on. Uploading now however wouldn't be beneficial. ] (]) 06:26, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Mfd bottom--></div>
{{#ifeq:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion|{{collapse bottom}}|}}

Latest revision as of 21:01, 16 December 2024

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: snow keep. Voters are invited to chime in at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Luigi Mangione. (non-admin closure) Launchballer 21:01, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Luigi Mangione

Draft:Luigi Mangione (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)​

This is a serious WP:BLPCRIME vio, even for a draft. POIs are innocent until proven guilty. EF 01:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Immediate delete per above. Departure– (talk) 01:19, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Okay, so I suppose it isn't a good fit for CSD but I think it should be. For all we know we've started a draft about an innocent man that will be acquitted and doesn't want any exposure - not the best practice when we know damn well he isn't notable until proven guilty in a court of law, which he may not be. Departure– (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Imo, this should be speedied, but since BLPCRIME doesn't have a specific tag, I brought it here instead. EF 01:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Delete per above. ~Darth Stabro 01:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I have changed the wording to make it suspected. Personisinsterest (talk) 01:21, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
It's still a severe violation of BLPCRIME, it reads as if "Luigi Mangione is a man who probably killed Brian Thompson", no matter how it's worded. EF 01:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Neutral wording doesn't fix the core problem. Per WP:SUSPECT:

For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured for that crime.

This article is about someone who 48 hours ago was nobody and who in 48 hours may once again be nobody - a private citizen only put to public figuredom under the accusation of being a murderer. If he ends up being our guy, it should probably be merged into Killing of Brian Thompson anyway. Departure– (talk) 01:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I've blanked the draft for now. Everything was a BLP violation, so I suppose now if someone else wants to A3 this go ahead. All sources establish notability by connecting him with a crime he hasn't even been convicted of. Departure– (talk) 03:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
None of what you've said is correct or relevant. —Alalch E. 09:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
SNOW delete, also noting that someone un-blanked the draft. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 07:29, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
many articles on individual killers who only became notable for the murder they committed We have zero idea if he actually committed the crime, though. "Charged" and "convicted" are completely different, and this draft is just a bunch of "alleged" and "suspected". EF 14:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Hence why it's a draft? Do you have a WP:PAG-based reason to delete this draft or is it just WP:IDONTLIKEIT? —Locke Cole • t • c 14:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Yes, I gave you one, WP:BLPCRIME. Per this guideline: A living person accused of a crime is presumed innocent until convicted by a court of law. Accusations, investigations, arrests and charges do not amount to a conviction. For individuals who are not public figures—that is, individuals not covered by § Public figures—editors must seriously consider not including material—in any article—that suggests the person has committed or is accused of having committed a crime, unless a conviction has been secured for that crime. He has not been convicted yet, and this entire draft reads as if he is accused of this, hence the "Accusations, investigations, arrests and charges do not amount to a conviction". Great job assuming bad faith, though. EF 14:48, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
WP:BLPCRIME is not relevant here, the shooter achieved notoriety before his identity was revealed and was already a "public figure" from all the public reaction. He is receiving even more reliably sourced coverage after he was arrested and charged to further cement his public figure status. —Locke Cole • t • c 15:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
It is, though. Does CBS, CNN or ABC convict people of crimes? No! He may be notable, but at this state the draft is a BLPCRIME violation, no matter how much coverage he gets. For all we know, Mangione could just be an impostor profiting fame off of the killing. EF 15:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
WP:NOR is that way. Meanwhile we must follow what reliable sources are saying on the matter, not what an editor here thinks based on their own opinion. —Locke Cole • t • c 15:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
How is "Mangione hasn't been convicted yet" an opinion piece? This MfD isn't because of his notability, he's obviously notable, it's the fact that this draft is written horribly and is a massive BLPCRIME violation, the point I've been trying to get across. Notability and RS coverage isn't an excuse to potentially falsely accuse someone of a crime, in this case murder. EF 15:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
Even if he ends up being innocent/acquitted, he will still be notable for simply being accused at this point. And your OR is the statement about Mangione being an “imposter”. —Locke Cole • t • c 17:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
We have zero idea if he actually committed the crime. Misplaced Pages does care whether he committed the crime. Misplaced Pages cares that the subject is covered by an avalanche of news stories. He is Misplaced Pages-notable, and the lack of reliable sourcing for certain critical facts is not a reason to delete a notable topic, but is a reason to read WP:V. SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
I mean.... vote how you want, but it's pretty silly to vote "snow keep" when there's six people voting to delete, and you're the second one to vote keep. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:15, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Mostly did it as an ironic vote to counteract the “SNOW delete” !vote only six hours into the discussion. —Locke Cole • t • c 04:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
…which was a proper SNOW, as nobody had voted keep prior. EF 19:55, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Anyone closing a discussion with only a handful of !votes after just a few hours as “snow” is begging to have a visit to DRV. Nothing proper about it. —Locke Cole • t • c 22:54, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep, and mainspace. Well sourced, and subject to an avalanche of new coverage. Do not redirect to Killing of Brian Thompson boldly, but do propose doing so on the talk page; I predict that the page will be decided to pass WP:BLP1E. The page has no BLP violations that justify deletion in any namespace. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep. I would have argued a delete prior to him being charge but now that he has been charged it's clear that Mangione could be notable by himself. This is not an endorsement to move the page to main space, to be clear. It's not a BLP violation because the person has been named publicly by the media and the draft does not say he has committed a crime. Esolo5002 (talk) 21:03, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep - The version as of approx. 2200 GMT, 10 December, is neutrally worded and reflects what is currently very notable. This is one of multiple reports in reliable sources about him (not about the crime, but about the criminal prosecution of him for being the alleged criminal), and this is one of multiple reports by reliable sources about reaction to the charges against him. There would be no need to delete an article about him, and there is no need to delete a draft about him. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:23, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete per BLPCRIME and 1E. Notability conferred as a suspect in a crime is not independent notability and breaks BLPCRIME pre-conviction. If some new information comes out indicating he's potentially independently notable, I can see swapping my vote to a keep as a draft. Alerted to this discussion via a social media post. I don't feel canvassed, but I wouldn't have seen this otherwise. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
    I would argue his notability isn’t really relevant because this is a draft. Esolo5002 (talk) 01:08, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
    It is relevant here as the only reason we have a draft is accusations that he committed a crime, which is a BLP issue. If there's not a good case for his potential as independently notable, the sole purpose of this draft is the potentially BLP-violating nature. Unless we can identify a case for notability with this person, he is 1E solely on accusations and this draft ought to go. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
    @Pbritti As discussed already, BLP/BLPCRIME aren't relevant because we have substantial reliable sourcing for this, sourcing that is persistent and not being used as OR. BLP1E doesn't apply because of #3 as mentioned by Hzh below: 3. The event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant, and his role was both substantial and well documented. In this case, the event is significant and has its own article, and the accused individual's role is well documented and substantial. —Locke Cole • t • c 18:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep It's a draft. Drafts shouldn't be subject to deletion discussion based on notability guidelines until they reach the mainspace. Waddles 🗩 🖉 04:48, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep There is more than enough notable covarge to justify keeping a draft of him around. Yedaman54 (talk) 08:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Oh, definite keep. This draft has the potential to be greatly expanded on with massive amounts of coverage amongst WP:RSes now and over the next several months to the point of a valid WP:SPLIT, and based on said RS coverage, I'd say it also passes WP:10Y too. 92.19.129.131 (talk) 18:05, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep The coverage is huge. OsageOrange (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep the draft. I'm not sure that Luigi Mangione is notable enough for a separate page yet (even though I think he will be soon), but that doesn't mean the draft needs to be deleted. It should stay in draftspace where it can be worked on until notability is demonstrated imo. BuySomeApples (talk) 10:25, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep Didn't think people would want to delete a draft, but no matter, I think this would apply to a mainspace article. He has achieved notoriety/fame beyond WP:BLPCRIME for it to be applicable. Discussions in sources have moved on to his celebrity/folk hero status - , which suggests he has individual notability. A jury may or may not convict him, innocent or guilty, it would not matter as to his notability. WP:BLP1E also allows for an article like this (see criterion #3), so it is a moot point. Hzh (talk) 10:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Keep as Luigi Mangione is a very notable person at the moment and could very easily become subject of an article whether he is guilty or not guilty later on. Uploading now however wouldn't be beneficial. Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 06:26, 16 December 2024 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.