Death of Ian Tomlinson is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
	This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 31, 2010.
Article milestones Date Process Result February 28, 2010 Featured article candidate Promoted
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 23, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the family of Ian Tomlinson thanked The Guardian for posting footage of an alleged assault on him?

This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography 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 Death Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death 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.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Law Enforcement Low‑importance This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. London Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Index Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3

This page has archives. Topics are automatically archived 1 or more at a time by Lowercase sigmabot III if there are more than 3.

As the article currently stands, it overwhelmingly uses primary sources that document coverage of the event as it took place. I'm not really seeing much secondary analysis, let alone something like scholarly analysis. As it stands, this article falls short of the minimum standard at WP:PRIMARY. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:11, 8 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The extensive newspaper coverage is WP:SECONDARY. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:12, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But it's almost all contemporary reporting which is arguably primary (this is a subject of some debate) and not ideal for a featured article. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:38, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEWSPRIMARY goes into when news media is a primary source and when it's secondary. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 17:24, 9 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Thebiguglyalien, HJ Mitchell, and Nomoskedasticity: Have these concerns been resolved? If not, should this go to WP:FAR? Z1720 (talk) 04:03, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced that this article can stand on its own, since it looks like the whole thing is a review of news coverage. I see a few high quality secondary sources that give it significant coverage (doi:10.1093/bjc/azr086 and doi:10.1093/bjc/azq033), so it still meets WP:Bare notability, but they're not in the article. And even if they were, most of the sources would still bring WP:PRIMARY concerns. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:38, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more interested in police shootings specifically but this incident comes up a lot in sources discussing police use of force generally so it's definitely notable enough for an article of its own but the article would be a lot thinner if it weren't for the contemporary reporting. To be clear, I don't see a problem with using contemporary reporting to add meat to the bones and would not support an AfD or merge proposal, but I'm not sure this would pass FAC today. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of agree, the analysis mostly seems to be what was reported on at the time and in what order, as opposed to what actually happened as we know it now.

Also without putting too fine a point on it, it reads almost like a plug piece for the Guardian and the Observer (The Guardian's sister paper)... I find it interesting that any reference to the Guardian and Observer are properly formatted but other news outlets aren't for instance. ~2025-33548-11 (talk) 13:11, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• @Thebiguglyalien and HJ Mitchell: If there are concerns about this article's quality, should this go to WP:FAR, WP:AfD, or somewhere else to resolve concerns? Would anyone be interested in initiating an appropriate process? Z1720 (talk) 02:34, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm certain it would survive an AfD. FAR I'm not so sure. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:09, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]