Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Lanza: Difference between revisions

Adam Lanza (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)

Exclusively known for the infamous mass shooting. I highly doubt there is a single source in this article that doesn’t mention the words “shooting” or “Sandy Hook”. Xacaranda (talk) 05:05, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as WP:1E states “If the event is highly significant, and the individual’s role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate.” The Sandy Hook shooting is a highly significant event, there are articles on the reactions, conspiracy theories, a memorial, and gun control laws afterwards; And obviously Adam Lanza’s role within it is a large one as he was the shooter. ILoveSmallEdits (talk) 05:19, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep as I added more reliable sources that are about Adam Lanza himself and the shooting. KungfusockandMJfan (talk) 05:26, 9 February 2026 (UTC)strike sock– Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:37, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete as WP:1E also states “The general rule is to cover the event, not the person”, and the article about the shooting is exhaustive and well sourced. Mass killers often seek attention, publicity and “recognition”, and responsible WP editors should not provide them. The Columbine High School massacre perpetrators do not have their own articles. Hasn’t this been discussed elsewhere, and if not, why not? Masato.harada (talk) 09:24, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  The Columbine shooters do have their own articles. PageTheEditor (talk) 21:25, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Crime. Xacaranda (talk) 05:05, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 06:56, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep Clear notability per WP:GNG and WP:CRIME. Plenty of sustained third party sourcing since this happened.BabbaQ (talk) 11:07, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes WP:GNG as there is plenty of coverage in secondary sources at google books and google scholar. IJA (talk) 16:20, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Per WP:SNOWBALL. Zuck28 (talk) 16:43, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: SNOWBALL isn’t policy or a guideline, it’s an essay. – Shearonink (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep He passes WP:PERP, because Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting is is a well-documented historic event as required by the guideline. Kelob2678 (talk) 20:40, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  I don’t think this article should be deleted but the reason you just gave is not plausible. PageTheEditor (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  Why? Kelob2678 (talk) 21:34, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  There are many other notable mass shooters who don’t have their own page. The problem is with this particular one, is that other editors have agreed not to have separate article for Lanza. Although, I don’t think it should be deleted (I am not advocating for the article to remain live). PageTheEditor (talk) 02:37, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  I’ve made plenty of separate articles which have been suppressed numerous times. It’s so unfair. But sometimes you just have to work with what you have. PageTheEditor (talk) 02:43, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:OTHERSTUFF. The Sandy Hook shooting is extremely prominent. It has pageviews equal to Columbine, more than 50 interwiki links, and many hits in Google Scholar. It was the subject of a book. Kelob2678 (talk) 11:35, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge with Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting where there is already a substantial biography, including a close-up of his photo. This article is a content fork. WP:CRIME (same guideline as WP:PERP) says: “A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person.” and goes on to say “Where there is such an existing article, it may be appropriate to create a sub-article, but only if this is necessitated by considerations of article size.” This article actually fails WP:PERP because an article about the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting already exists. The question should be: Is the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting too large to incorporate a biography of Lanza and is a sub-article needed? – Cameron Dewe (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Per others, WP:BIO1E does not apply since the event was significant, and Lanza’s role in it was heavily documented in the reliable sources in the aftermath of the tragedy (cf. John Hinckley Jr.). JeffSpaceman (talk) 21:49, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Very obviously notable per WP:1E, WP:CRIME, WP:PERP and WP:GNG. There is an absolute mountain of coverage about the subject. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, James Holmes and Nikolas Cruz are clearly notable as their actions and pasts have been covered a lot by reliable sources, so it stands to reason that the same applies to Lanza. Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 21:54, 9 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Merge with Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting Multiple editors have agreed not to have a separate article on the shooter. Also this form lacks accurate, or substantial evidence. PageTheEditor (talk) 02:45, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: There is virtually nothing in this former redirect that does not already exist in the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting article. It’s a WP:CONTENTFORK at this point. And, though WP:PSEUDO is an essay under Avoiding harm – and not policy or a guideline, I think it applies in this case:

An article under the title of a person’s name should substantially be a full and balanced biography of that person’s public life. If the person is notable only in connection with a single event, and little or no other information is available to use in the writing of a balanced biography, that person should be covered in an article regarding the event, with the person’s name as a redirect to the event article placing the information in context.

– Shearonink (talk) 07:16, 10 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]