Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashli Babbitt: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:21, 7 January 2021

Ashli Babbitt

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Pretty textbook WP:BLP1E. Should be redirected to 2021 United States Capitol protests. GorillaWarfare (talk) 04:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep vote (disclosure: I expanded this from GW's redirect from reliable sources: thank you GW for notifying me about this AfD nomination) .. BLP1E requires fulfilling all three criteria, not just one. It clearly will not meet the 2nd criteria "is likely to remain, a low-profile individual". There is no basis for proposing such a likelihood. George Floyd for comparison similarly only became notable due to his death and has an entire article to himself since June 4th after his May 25th death. The 3rd condition is also not met: "the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented". That a person was shot to death during the protest has received very substantial coverage by many news outlets, many of which are detailing it thoroughly and rapidly, to convey the severity of the violence which occurred. WakandaQT (talk) 04:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If millions of people worldwide protest her killing then I can certainly see that argument; until then it is far too soon to suggest that she will achieve George Floyd levels of coverage. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have evidence that literally "millions" had protested the May 25th death by June 4th? I'm guessing that tally came later. WakandaQT (talk) 05:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I also wasn't arguing for keeping the George Floyd article on June 4 either. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About condition 3: "the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented". The event is about a number of people storming the US Capitol. She was simply one of many who entered the building, and died as a result. Her role in the event was not substantial, and therefore condition 3 is met --Gimmethegepgun (talk) 12:28, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As per WP:RAPID. Ongoing major story with International coverage passes WP:GNG the only question is whether it will pass WP:LASTING that cannot be determined at this point. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:52, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unremarkable in life, this person can be covered adequately in the Capitol Protests article. WWGB (talk) 04:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are you arguing that "remarkable in life" is a requirement to have an article about a person who is killed? There is both a George Floyd and Killing of George Floyd article. It seems pretty clear what is considered adequately remarkable to have these articles is the events of his death: he was an amateur rap artist and film star since the 90s and nobody even tried to make an article about him until after he died, so I believe you're inserting false criteria here WWGB. WakandaQT (talk) 05:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with WWGB - the comparison with George Floyd is not adequate. --DeMonsoon (talk) 05:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Floyd is an adequate example that objecting on the basis of "remarkable in life" is not valid grounds for exclusion if death makes remarkable. You could also argue in both cases that since video coverage exists of both of their pre-death struggles that they are actually also notable for the final moments of their life, even if they had both died by the time most people had seen the footage. WakandaQT (talk) 05:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:OTHERSTUFF when debating AfDs. Wylie pedia @ 11:41, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 05:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This is a textbook WP:BLP1E, and the article is almost entirely details related to the "protests" anyway, so there's nothing here justifying a standalone page. This is like George Floyd? Let's get real here. There were at least 3 other deaths today, and this woman's death is a footnote, not the centerpiece like Floyd's. Nohomersryan (talk) 05:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You might make a comparison to Heather Heyer as a death which occurred amidst larger events, but being shot by police storming the capitol is much more high-profile than being hit by a car in the middle of a street. WakandaQT (talk) 05:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While the event is higher-profile, I don't think it's safe to say this death already is. Heyer was intentionally murdered by a civilian and was the only person on the ground to die at Charlottesville, neither of which you can say about Babbit, a trespasser who got unlucky. Nohomersryan (talk) 05:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per WP:RAPID. ImYourTurboLover (talk) 05:13, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect and put info in main article, as is done with Heather Heyer. ... discospinster _talk 05:14, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

problem there is people will just blank the section, only way to reliably prevent that censorship is a standalone article for now. WakandaQT (talk) 05:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, that's not "censorship", and second of all, it can be prevented in the way anything can be achieved on Wikipedia: achieving consensus for its inclusion on that article's talk page. GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:20, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If people continually blank it, then protect the page. ... discospinster _talk 05:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right now it's just much easier to keep track of information with a separate page. That article you want to merge it to is bloated beyond measure. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the false equivalence between this person and George Floyd is astoundingly disengenuous. Y2Kcrazyjoker4 (talk • contributions) 05:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: I did no equivocate them, just pointed out that Floyd is an example of someone we can't argue was notable enough in life for an article. His lack of one prior to death is pretty good evidence of that. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no significant coverage of her yet, only her death. Not notable for a stand-alone article. Elliot321 (talk | contribs) 05:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect: there is now coverage of things besides her death in many papers, including her online political activism, her military career, her widower and orphaned children. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Based on current coverage of this event, all three conditions of WP:BLP1E are met. /Tpdwkouaa (talk) 05:33, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: only 1 is met, not 2 and 3. Explained above. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – no notability outside of Capitol events, so delete page and create redirect to appropriate section in 2021 United States Capitol protests. I realize that people are citing WP:RAPID to justify keeping it, but it is not our place to guess if she will become more notable (see WP:CRYSTAL), and as things currently stand, she is not notable. Also note that WP:RAPID does not state that new non-notable pages should be kept automatically in the short term; it suggests alternatives to deletion as one option – i.e. a merge to another page, as is being proposed here. RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

there is no section and if we did that it's pretty clearly going to get snipped down and eliminated eventually, which is why she didn't have one to begin with. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – One of several people who died as a result of mob actions. Not notable outside the manner of death. EnjoysButter (talk) 05:38, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

her death happened as a result of whoever pulled the trigger, and "manner" is merely "gunshot victim". Beyond manner it's the context/circumstances and coverage. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Textbook example of BLP1E 212.74.201.231 (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That criteria is not enough to exclude people from having an article. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Per ... discospinster Thriley (talk) 05:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rewrite. I find the comparison to Floyd to be tenuous but logical. Heyer is a more likely comparison. Either way, this woman is notable now and will be more so when more details are released to the public. Squeeps10 ^{Talk to me} Please ping when replying. 05:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Subject not really notable enough on her own for a complete article. A small section in the 2021 United States Capitol protests article would work better. Fernsong (talk) 05:55, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should not be pushing for that with all the activity that page has, fair content about her would be hard to retain and monitor in that flurry. A stub is appropriate. This way we can properly detail what reliable sources have revealed without it further bloating the main article and then using that bloat as precedent to trim details about the subject. WakandaQT (talk) 06:17, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, this page itself doesn't have very much going for it, other than a short background and the fact that she had posted about QAnon and election conspiracy stuff, and seeing as how at least three other people have died in this protest, it would make more sense to include a brief section about "Casualties of the 2021 US Capitol protests" than have four stub articles about people who are otherwise not very noteworthy in themselves. Fernsong (talk) 07:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to 2021 United States Capitol protests. By the time this AfD is over, all the relevant facts will be out and it can easily be merged (if it hasn't been effectively merged already). AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 06:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2021 United States Capitol protests, which may or may not be renamed soon. Topic isn't notable in and of itself per nom, but it would be useful as a redirect to the relevant article, where we can talk about Babbitt more if necessary. Theleekycauldron (talk) 06:49, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If Babbitt shows to generate significant coverage and become a specific cultural talking point in and of it self like George Floyd or Heather Heyer, the article can be rewritten. But as of now, it hasn't proven itself to be notable. Theleekycauldron (talk) 06:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note though that Heather Heyer is a redirect. - Astrophobe (talk) 06:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Noted! Sorry about that, I didn't check - the context in which people were bringing it up made it sound like an article. As for Floyd, Babbitt and Floyd aren't nearly similar. Theleekycauldron (talk) 09:19, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to whatever article or articles come out of the mess at Talk:2021 United States Capitol protests, per nom and those who have mentioned 1E. In particular an encyclopedic article about her would inevitably end up being an article about her death, which would be covered better elsewhere. Given what little is here, redirect over merge. - Astrophobe (talk) 06:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete So WP:BLP1E, it's not even funny. sixtynine ^{• whaddya want? •} 07:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. There is not a single notable thing about this individual except the manner of her death, which is already covered. Add biographical info to the main article if you must, but this page does not look useful. RexSueciae (talk) 07:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. Reliable sources exist, and given the context of the event, will likely continue to exist. That being said, the death is barely covered on the main page, so merging makes sense. Once things are more settled, this can be split out later as needed for size reasons. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 07:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: At this juncture, her only semblance of notability is that she was killed while attempting to break into the House Chamber. There is sufficient coverage on 2021 United States Capitol protests. DÅRTHBØTTØ_(T•C) 07:50, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2021 United States Capitol protests, since this is classic WP:BLP1E. Keep the redirect since it's a plausible search term and they're WP:CHEAP. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 08:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wikipedia has an article for Camille Balanche, a person whose only notable impact on the world was being the first Swiss cyclist to win a downhill world title. If we can have articles about minor athletes and actors, we can have articles about people whose life and death have the potential to change the course of all US history, especially if the events surrounding her death turn ill. For good or for ill, Ashli Babbit's actions and death have made her a noteworthy person, and her notoriety is only going to grow in the coming days. The page is already needed and that need will only increase. Assuming there is nothing worth discussing about her life prior to her death (which I do not accept, but let us just assume she did nothing else of note) then this page should perhaps be renamed 'Death of Ashli Babbit' or something similar, but not deleted. JoePhin 08:22, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Seems the correct action to take as this protestor has become a major part of the storyline, there are reliable resources and should not be deleted. Edmund Patrick – confer 08:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol : No evidence she is notable outside this single event. She can be named in that article, instead of the current redirect back to this stub (piped from "an intruder"). That said, I am not sure if we should name such individuals (privacy issues). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge She was an important figure in a major historical event (most American protests lack fatalities, her being one and one that literally broke into and was killed in the house chamber) and, furthermore, she represents the average protester which gives researchers an idea about the culture and politics of the protest. In the coming years, people need a cultural reference for this protest so they understand the conspiracy theories influencing it and the power those possessed over people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackson Hamilton (talk • contribs) 09:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect per Piotr. The event, 2021 storming of the United States Capitol, is highly significant. However, her death, while tragic, does not mean that she had a substatial role in the event beyond what the other rioters were doing. As such, WP:BLP1E calls against a separate biography. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:08, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment / merge: Multiple editors are referencing WP:BLP1E, but as the notable event we are discussing is her death, what you want is WP:BIO1E. At any rate: information about her would probably be valuable from a historical perspective, but I don't think an article about her would ever reach beyond stub-class. Merging to the event article 2021 storming of the United States Capitol seems suitable. --AndreniW (talk) 09:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, ideally move to Shooting of Ashli Babbitt or Death of Ashli Babbitt. I think anyone being shot dead in the Capitol building is enough of a significant event to warrant its own article. McPhail (talk) 09:32, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is severe Americentrism. BeŻet (talk) 12:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This person does not meet notability guidelines — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bravetheif (talk • contribs) 09:26, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. So far, this is a BLP1E, but a probably significant aspect of the broader event at issue. If more and lasting coverage accumulates, a spinoff article can be reconsidered. Sandstein 09:42, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. –♠Vami _IV†♠ 09:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to a few sentences in 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. This is WP:BLP1E for a recently deceased person with no other notability. Boud (talk) 10:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete MikaelaArsenault (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect, while her death is saddening, she is not a notable person. BeŻet (talk) 10:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:RAPID. Störm (talk) 10:50, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Gender bias on Wikipedia. Giggity Giggity Goo! 10:53, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How is gender bias relevant? Is anyone supporting deletion because the victim was a woman? 45.251.33.62 (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This argument would only make sense if we kept a male victim and ignored a female victim. Otherwise it's frankly completely irrelevant. BeŻet (talk) 11:44, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Textbook example of WP:BLP1E. Completely non-notable individual. Melmann 10:55, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:ONEEVENT. Hekerui (talk) 11:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect as a subsection in the article. She is notable only per WP:ONEEVENT. 45.251.33.62 (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect No real reason to keep the article. scope_creep^Talk 11:34, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and move to Shooting of Ashli Babbitt, per BPL1E. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:45, 7 January 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Merge and redirect as a subsection in the article 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. - DrachenFyre (talk) 11:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and/or Redirect to the storming of the Capitol article. No independent notability, no reason to have a stand alone article about either her or the shooting itself independent of the storming of the Capitol article. --Jayron 32 11:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Melmann. Mjroots (talk) 11:56, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to article on Capitol protests. Heather Heyer, who is a redirect, is the nearest equivalent in recent years, George Floyd is not equivalent. PatGallacher (talk) 11:58, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to article on Capitol protests, at least until we have clear and reliably sourced information about the incident. Deb (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Capitol storming article. Not sufficiently notable for a separate page per WP:BLP1E. Hergilei (talk) 12:48, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or redirect to Capitol storming article. Subject not notable enough for a separate article. See WP:BLP1E. Donaldd23 (talk) 12:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. She seems to have no notability outside of that event. Seems to be a textbook example of WP:BLP1E and WP:NOTNEWS 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Delete Person has trivial coverage for their notable event in which they was shot compared to other notable one-eventers like George Floyd or Rodney King who was the center of their Police brutality movements and had mass coverage. She doesn't deserve her own article per WP:ONEEVENT. All this information can be mentioned the 2021 United States Capitol riots.ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 13:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and return to redirect. I do not see any way that the subject meets notability requirements other than their involvement with the Capitol riot. Unlike the case of George Floyd, Babbitt has not achieved independent notability.
5225_C (talk • contributions) 13:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, move to 'Shooting of Ashli Babbitt'. In the midst of this historical event the shooting death of a 14-year Air Force veteran stands out as the day's tragedy. Much coverage has already been given and it's still early in the reporting of yesterday's events. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:18, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete far-right propaganda effort to sensationalise incident. Acousmana (talk) 13:21, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol per WP:BLP1E. Horacio Vara^{wanna talk?} 13:27, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delect & redirect to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol per WP:BLP1E. RIP Kingoflettuce (talk) 13:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The only notable thing about her was that she committed a crime and was shot. RIP but not notable. -- Kndimov (talk) 13:36, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and redirect to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol per WP:BLP1E Jayden (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Agree that this is a far-right propaganda effort to sensationalize incident of a non-notable person that was shot while in the process of committing a crime.TFBCT1 (talk) 13:53, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Delete. Lunacy isn't notability. TunaSushi (talk) 14:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable outside the manner of death, I am also fine with Redirect Mardetanha (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect to 2021 storming of the United States Capitol. Subject not notable enough for own article. Kstern (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The subject does not, in any way, warrant their own article. Redirection would be acceptable, but an individual article is completely unnecessary and not how things like this are usually handled.

@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 *'''Delete''' Not notable outside the manner of death, I am also fine with Redirect [[User:Mardetanha|Mardetanha]] ([[User talk:Mardetanha|talk]]) 14:05, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' or '''Redirect''' to [[2021 storming of the United States Capitol]]. Subject not notable enough for own article. [[User:Kstern|Kstern]] ([[User talk:Kstern|talk]]) 14:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' The subject does not, in any way, warrant their own article. Redirection would be acceptable, but an individual article is completely unnecessary and not how things like this are usually handled.