Talk:Simi Valley Rapist
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Jberkel in topic RFD discussion: January 2022
The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).
It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.
A rapist from Simi Valley. PseudoSkull says ah, but it's one specific rapist from Simi Valley, not just any rapist from there! I don't buy that argument. Encyclopaedia material. There are loads of Boston Stranglers and suchlike. Names for an individual should be something really special to get into a dictionary. Equinox ◑ 13:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Equinox Yes, one specific rapist, as mentioned in different sources existing independently from each other. I'll admit though that this is an edge case, since it's a rather obscure one, and there are tons of others not covered (yet). There is also a possibility that there could be another named "Simi Valley Rapist" so this name might not have too much in the way of definitiveness in its own right. In that way you could argue it's SOP, since it is "that one rapist who focused efforts in Simi Valley". Tons of criminals are similarly nicknamed based on location, so it is easy to form and therefore understand the implications (also criminals, including this one, are often nicknamed long before a suspect actually emerges). However if his nickname were "Simi Bad Boy" or something, it would be less obvious and the formation more interesting, so something like that would definitely deserve an entry and in that case I would not take the "encyclopedic" argument as valid at all. No comment at this time on the validity of Boston Strangler entries.
Abstain for now, interested to see community opinion on this specific case.PseudoSkull (talk) 14:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC) - Delete. Running out of words? Encyclopaedic and also very US-specific on top. –Jberkel 14:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jberkel Want to reiterate, calling it "encyclopedic" is a bad argument. Considering it SOP is more valid as an argument. Like I said, if it were something funky and unexpected like "Simi Bad Boy" I would be voting a strong Keep here regardless of that it's about a specific individual. Also being US-specific should never be a reason for deletion. Millinocket is US-specific. Should that be deleted too? PseudoSkull (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- That's a town in the US. It's a place name and it's probably going to be around for some time. That's different to an ephemeral nickname for a criminal only used by some local US media outlets. And the information you put in the entry was very much encyclopaedic: number of victims, name of the prison etc. – Jberkel 15:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Jberkel Want to reiterate, calling it "encyclopedic" is a bad argument. Considering it SOP is more valid as an argument. Like I said, if it were something funky and unexpected like "Simi Bad Boy" I would be voting a strong Keep here regardless of that it's about a specific individual. Also being US-specific should never be a reason for deletion. Millinocket is US-specific. Should that be deleted too? PseudoSkull (talk) 14:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
- Delete (therefore please speedy as I am the creator and know what the consensus will turn out) as an instance of a predictable formula for criminal nicknames that exists in the thousands. However I do not want this discussion to be the precedent for deleting entries like Joan of Arc or Gun Girl which are not formulaic at all and happen to be about individuals; there's still some lexical interest with those. PseudoSkull (talk) 14:33, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
RFD-deleted (speedied), as per the creator's wish. --Fytcha (talk) 14:39, 2 January 2022 (UTC)