This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ryan Wesley Routh article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article was nominated for deletion on 16 September 2024. The result of the discussion was no consensus.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Florida. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page; if you have any questions, please consult the FAQ.FloridaWikipedia:WikiProject FloridaTemplate:WikiProject FloridaFlorida articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaii, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hawaii 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.HawaiiWikipedia:WikiProject HawaiiTemplate:WikiProject HawaiiHawaii articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Only extended-confirmed editors may make edits related to the topic area, though editors who are not extended-confirmed may post constructive comments and make edit requests related to articles within the topic area on article talk pages. Should disruption occur on article talk pages, administrators may take enforcement actions against disruptive editors and/or apply page protection on article talk pages. However, non-extended-confirmed editors may not make edits to internal project discussions related to the topic area, even on article talk pages. Internal project discussions include, but are not limited to, Articles for deletion nominations, WikiProjects, requests for comment, requested moves, and noticeboard discussions.
Editors who violate any listed restrictions may be blocked by any uninvolved administrator, even on a first offense.
An editor must be aware before they can be sanctioned.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to the Balkans or Eastern Europe, which has been designated as a contentious topic.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to articles about living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully.
In what universe is this person notable enough to have an entire Wikipedia page?
"Michael Steven Sandford could face two years in prison after an incident in which he grabbed a police officer’s gun in an attempt to shoot Trump"; "The documents say Sandford later told a federal agent that he drove from California to Las Vegas with a plan to kill Trump." [1]Ostalgia (talk) 18:58, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
By that logic every single NFL game should have a separate Wikipedia article because each of them is covered heavily by reliable sources. Do you not see how little that argument makes sense? 71.114.123.162 (talk) 17:05, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The presence of coverage on a particular topic by reliable sources does not in and of itself meet the standard for notability. You do understand that, don’t you? 71.114.123.162 (talk) 23:35, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That’s not true though. Notability is determined by the topics overall encyclopedic importance, not by how widely covered it is by reliable sources. The fact that an event, especially a recent event, is cover by reliable sources, does not in and of itself establish notability. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 17:53, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Using Wikipedia to push the narrative that democrats are trying to kill trump is absolutely repulsive and reprehensible. trump was not harmed in this event. The alleged party didn’t even see trump at any point. This isn’t notable for Wikipedia. This recentism and an attempt to leverage Wikipedia for political purposes with an election near. Plain and simple. I may lose this argument and not get my way, but I am right and I stand by my position. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 23:38, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is pushing a narrative. Wikipedians are simply documenting the reliably sourced facts about notable topics. Censoring true information because you don't like it politically goes against WP:NPOV. Also, there's been a deletion nomination, and the result was in favour of keeping the article. The debate is settled, and your side lost. 2401:7000:CA09:4700:D98B:79D5:9029:DB3E (talk) 15:13, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not once did I say that anything whatsoever should be censored. Literally not once. I said that this entire article could have simply been a sentence or two in the security incidents article and 100% does not warrant two entire separate articles about this. I may have lost, but I am not wrong. 71.114.123.162 (talk) 17:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was present in the article and then removed per BLPCRIME. I can see the interpretation of that policy, however the investigation into his father directly led to his arrest and he was interviewed by the press in regards to his father. I think that makes him relevant to the article regarding his father. poketape (talk) 19:33, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree that Routh's son getting arrested should be kept, considering that the arrest was reported in a variety of sources. In the recent NPR article, for example, it writes - "Oran publicly came to his dad’s defense after his arrest last week, saying in a statement that "'I don’t have any comment beyond a character profile of him as a loving and caring father and an honest, hardworking man.'". Also, his father's crime WAS the reason why he was arrested in the first place. CNN Reports "According to the complaint, FBI agents were searching Oran Routh’s residence and devices on September 21, days after his father was arrested, 'in connection with an investigation unrelated to child exploitation.'" Yoshiman6464♫🥚20:16, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep cuz of the severity of the charges. if he was arrested for petty theft or stealing autos or something id support removing it but this is serious at implies this craziness runs i nthe family Kasperquickly (talk) 15:58, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - Notability is not inherited (literally, in this case). The son's actions and arrest have nothing to do with why Ryan Wesley Routh is notable, and it is irrelevant if the discovery of the son's alleged acts stemmed from the investigation of his father. --ZimZalaBimtalk16:14, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that is irrelevant to inclusion in the article about his father. Relevant text: "Caution: This section is not a content guideline or policy. Nor does it apply to speedy deletion or proposed deletion, as they are not deletion discussions. It only applies to arguments to avoid at WP:Articles for deletion." and "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A); relationships do not confer notability. However, person A may be included in the related article on B. For example, Jason Allen Alexander is included in the article on Britney Spears and the page Jason Allen Alexander merely redirects to that article." This is a discussion on being included in an article, not for a seperate article to be made. poketape (talk) 23:07, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My point was that the section of the Notability policy you're referring to (Notability is inherited) specifically says that it is not a content guideline or policy, it only applies to articles for deletion. I don't see anything within that policy that states his son cannot receive a section on the article. Additionally, that policy ends with the following: "Also, notability not being inherited is not by itself grounds for deletion; subjects can still be notable by other means and even when they are not, often such articles can be merged or redirected to the article on the associated subject (see also the Just not notable section above)," which again, is what's intended, as his son is being added as a section to his article (a hypothetical article merge you could say if the son's article did exist). poketape (talk) 22:36, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove - The son's arrest is of only tangential relevance to the father's article, and the son has not received enough coverage in reliable sources for us to consider him notable in his own right. 203.211.104.189 (talk) 17:35, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. Not familiar enough with BLP policy, but I want to note that I think this arrest could be indicative of his parenting style, plus the event was directly catalyzed by his actions. Scaledish! Talkish? Statish.11:40, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Not inherited policy I addressed above so I don't want to restate my argument for that, but please read the text above and address that if you find it necessary to do so. As for BLPCRIME, my opinion on that policy is that the son was investigated as part of the father's investigation; he was not investigated independently. That to me is what makes the difference and makes him relevant. My argument on the matter is based not their relationship by blood (although the son did participate in an interview defending his father, adding to his notability), it is the relationship through investigation. If the father had a friend who went through the same events, I'd say the same thing. poketape (talk) 22:45, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
