Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 Burgwedel stabbing
The nom is defective.  The nom says the event is not notable.  If it were not notable, it would not have received coverage from, as included in the article: 1. n-tv; 2. Die Welt; 3. Hannoversche Allgemeine Zeitung; 4. Bild; 5. The Local; 6. Focus (German magazine); 7. Tz (newspaper); 8. https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neue_Presse Neue Presse (on the German Wikipedia); 8. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.  Furthermore, if it were not notable, it would not have received continuous coverage on, as included in the article: 25 March, 26 March, 31 March, 28 March, 27 March, 29 March, 7 April, 2 April, 10 April, 12 April.  Furthermore, the nom says the aftermath is something about Facebook.  The nom is wrong.  The aftermath covers: (1). The national debate about immigration sparked in Germany as a result of this attack (with three ); (2). The response from the State Prime Minister; (3). The hate speech investigation; (4). The exploitation of the attack for electoral purposes by the third largest political party in Germany, i.e.,  Alternative_for_Germany|Alternative for Germany.  Objections raised by others include that this was a "regional" event.  This is erroneous.  If it were regional, why is it being covered by the following not local media: I- n-tv; II- Die Welt; III- The_Local|The Local; IV- Focus_(German_magazine)|Focus; Tz_(newspaper)|V- Tz (a Munich/Bavaria paper in the South, here covering a Hannover event in the Northwest); VI- Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.  The claim of "regional/local" is entirely disproven.  The final objection is .  This claim for deletion is based on a misreading of policy. The policy is aimed against entertainment news. Specifically,  reads "''routine news reporting on things like announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia''." This case on the contrary is a notable crime which has fueled a national debate (specifically: "knife attacks further fuels debate over refugees and violence"{{cite news|title=String of knife attacks further fuels debate over refugees and violence|url=https://www.thelocal.de/20180327/string-of-knife-attacks-further-fuels-debate-over-refugees-and-violence|accessdate=13 April 2018|publisher=The Local|date=27 March 2018}}; "The deed has triggered a political debate on juvenile delinquency and the integration of refugees"{{cite news|title=24-YEAR-OLD STABBED BY TEENAGERS: THE VICTIM|url=https://www.tag24.de/nachrichten/burgwedel-hannover-niedersachen-vivien-k-24-jaehrige-von-asylbewerber-17-niedergestochen-koma-erwacht-490384|accessdate=15 April 2018|work=Tag 24|date=29 March 2018|language=German|quote=The deed has triggered a political debate on juvenile delinquency and the integration of refugees.}}). Besides, this is clearly not "routine news reporting" on "announcements, sports, or celebrities". This is routine news reporting a major crime and therefore  does not apply. I can only recommend re-reading the  policy. Finally, the unsound arguments in favor of NOTNEWS are trumped by , which reads «''Articles about criminal acts, particularly those that fall within the category of "breaking news", are frequently the subject of deletion discussions. As with other events, media coverage can confer notability on a high-profile criminal act''», so keeping this article ought to be adjudicated by default, as clearly the coverage has been extensive and continuous
— User:XavierItzm, 21:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:NOTNEWS||WP:NCRIME (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)