Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shooting of John Caldwell

Shooting of John Caldwell

Shooting of John Caldwell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I have no strong opinion on this, but trying to repair a malformed nomination on behalf of User:Billsmith60 (who put the template on the article but never started the discussion). On the talk page, they wrote: "Why does this random act of violence, one of only tens of thousands that have occurred in Northern Ireland since 1968, have an article all of its own? No one died in this incident and I have, therefore, proposed its deletion".

As for my opinion, I don't think this passes WP:NEVENT, the sourcing is all breaking news and then court updates locally, not substantial, in-depth coverage from a wide variety of sources. No one has been convicted yet and there are few confirmed facts. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Northern Ireland. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Events-related AfD discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:24, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to New_Irish_Republican_Army#Actions (or Dissident_Irish_republican_campaign#2020_onward). As WP:ATD/R. (As noted by PARAKANYAA, and as implied in the initial (granted incomplete) nomination, this may fall within WP:NEVENT. Yes, the event covered in this title was (is) a "big deal". But, perhaps, not to the extent that a standalone title is warranted. Unless/until any WP:LASTING impacts are established, the current title just reads like WP:NOTNEWS coverage.) Can't support outright deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 12:13, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

  I SUPPORT this sensible proposal Billsmith60 (talk) 12:24, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

  I would support this. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:20, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Keep. Very high profile case with huge coverage in the British media. Clearly meets WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:18, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

  None of the sources are secondary, so it does not meet the GNG. PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:28, 13 May 2026 (UTC)

  Actually, there are quite a few secondary sources there. Just because a source is on a media site does not mean it can't be secondary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:23, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

  Sure, but none of these ones are secondary? Which ones do you think are? PARAKANYAA (talk) 17:20, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Police-related AfD discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer (talk) 00:50, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

• Merge to one of Guliolopez's suggestions and/or Police Service of Northern Ireland. Just a news story, not a subject of sustained secondary analysis. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:39, 19 May 2026 (UTC)
• Keep: The coverage has continued for years now so it's not just breaking news. It's been covered in diverse outlets in more than one country. It should be updated (if only modestly) with more recent coverage e.g.

If consensus goes against keep as is then the article should be reworked into a WP:BLP as the victim is also the subject of a more recent controversy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Taghdtaighde (talk • contribs) 23:40, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Comment. A passing mention in a sluggerotoole blogpost isn't significant coverage for the purposes of WP:NBLP. Guliolopez (talk) 13:28, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

Comment: The news blog in question is a fairly respected source of secondary coverage of current affairs, and WP:NBASIC is clear that depth of coverage in a BLP need not be substantial as long as there are multiple independent sources.

The above also overlooks the in-depth BBC article about the recent controversy, among others (e.g. ), which show he passes WP:VICTIM when taking into account all the coverage of the shooting, with lasting effect , including a significant award (WP:ANYBIO) , so even if the shooting is decided not to be notable, Caldwell himself is. Taghdtaighde (talk) 21:16, 21 May 2026 (UTC)

• Merge and redirect to New_Irish_Republican_Army#Actions seems the most reasonable suggestion per above. Agnieszka653 (talk) 03:33, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

  I AGREE with you. Where would one draw the line otherwise, one wonders? bigpad (talk) 15:25, 27 May 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 05:32, 25 May 2026 (UTC)

Is this debate going to stay open for ever? Billsmith60 (talk) 09:14, 30 May 2026 (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.