Talk:Death of Jeffrey Northrup

This article was nominated for deletion on 22 April 2024. The result of the discussion was keep.

Death Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

More information:
/
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Canada: Ontario Low‑importance

	Canada portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Ontario portal This article is supported by WikiProject Ontario.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Jeffrey Northrup.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Brigading attempt from subreddit

Heads up to editors, there's an attempt to influence the contents of this article stemming from a Reddit thread here: https://www.reddit.com/r/askTO/comments/1dhm8fm/updating_the_umar_zameer_wikipedia_page_to/

Their goal is not necessarily bad, but may draw users who will attempt to add bias. 2605:8D80:6C0:E5F0:C474:721C:C740:8A8F (talk) 05:35, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will keep an eye on it. That being said, the article could use some work. I'll see what I can do. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 15:15, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking frankly, I do not know that an article detailing a specific LEO's death on its face is noteworthy enough to warrant an article. Is this commonplace for other LEO deaths elsewhere on Wikipedia?

Salient details of the LEO's death could be adequately captured in an article addressing Crown v. Zameer which resulted from this event. It would provide a factual record to better illustrate the event at hand from relevant angles instead of a singular page regarding a singular LEO's involvement in it. Himay81 (talk) 16:44, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like this stance is summarized adequately by the site's guidelines on notability.

Wikipedia:Notability (people)#People notable for only one event Himay81 (talk) 16:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Himay81: Consensus for notability has already been discussed and established at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Northrup. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 18:39, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can and do appreciate that discussion already (I had already read it), but the majority of that discussion advocated for renaming the article (more related to the legal case) and focusing the article on the legal case, not the officer themself. Which is why I sought to bring that point up here. Himay81 (talk) 18:54, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Himay81: In that case, it would be best to open a move request. Instructions for doing so are at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Controversial. As for the content, the article isn't protected so you should be able add what you feel is necessary. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 19:05, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ARandomName123 Thank you for the feedback. I will look into those options then. Himay81 (talk) 19:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it helps, I've produced a rough draft of a R. v. Zameer article. It's built using an AI article generator that's been fed all the relevant articles I could find on CBC's website, as well as the judge's final verdict. The article also contains direct quotations from various sources.

You'll find the article at https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/12G_Xd12Wf239zJmka4H3f8F1BCs-ild5?usp=sharing

The text conversion of the CBC articles and judge statement is included in a separate file.

Unfortunately, NotebookLM doesn't allow for copying the footnotes, so they would have to be redone.

I'd check the article to make sure that no erroneous details were added, and also add other sources (trial transcript, additional newspapers, etc.) to improve the quality of the article. Canadianlegalguy (talk) 15:19, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 June 2024

It has been proposed in this section that Death of Jeffrey Northrup be renamed and moved to R. v. Zameer.

A bot will list this discussion on the requested moves current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil.

Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly.

Links: current log • target log • direct move

Death of Jeffrey Northrup → R. v. Zameer – The event of Northrup's death is fundamentally the core issue surrounding the trial of Crown v. Zameer, which realistically should be the primary topic on this matter. This topic should fundamentally be about that with the inclusion of Northrup's death and additional details in their totality, not a cursory discussion around just the LEO's death. That presents an undesirable bias centered on the LEO and not on any other substantial issues produced by and/or resultant of the death/trial (notably criticism of the Crown's arguments and theories by the judicial system, possible evidence of collusion admist Crown witnesses, jury instructions, etc). The fact that the trial has concluded, there exists extensive reporting through both legal filings and multiple media sources to substantiate a much more thorough representation of the event described and its greater consequences (as evidenced by judicial and jury outcomes and public discussion). Himay81 (talk) 19:59, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]