Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2016 Greater Noida Rape Case


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to Rape in India. The content is available under the redirect for anyone wishing to merge. Stifle (talk) 08:28, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

2016 Greater Noida Rape Case

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Had nominated it for speedy deletion previously, but was declined. Nominating per WP:NOTNEWS. The incident doesn't seem to have any WP:LASTING effects and neither WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE. The article itself has not been edited since about a month making me doubt its notability. Lemongirl942 (talk) 13:15, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:54, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:20, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment WP:NOTNEWS states "As Wikipedia is not a paper source, editors are encouraged to include current and up-to-date information within its coverage, and to develop stand-alone articles on significant current events" so the nomination criteria is unclear. Secondly, this incident received international attention and analysis, such as in ABC Australia, BBC (United Kingdom) and New York Times (US) AusLondonder (talk) 02:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Let me clarify that I'm nominating it for deletion since I cannot see the significance of this event. I cannot see WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE, nor any WP:LASTING effects. The event is not notable according to WP:EVENTCRITERIA which states Routine kinds of news events (including most crimes, accidents, deaths, celebrity or political news, "shock" news, stories lacking lasting value such as "water cooler stories," and viral phenomena) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance.. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:10, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The reason I used WP:NOTNEWS is because it also states However, not all verifiable events are suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. followed by criteria which states why routine news reports may not be suitable for including in Wikipedia. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:15, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
 * User:Lemongirl942, The guidelines are routinely interpreted as saying that a story that receives the kind of worldwide coverage AusLondoner links to above is not the kind of "routine" story covered by NOTNEWS. While rape is a horrible, violent crime by definition, the distinction here is between a type of rape that gets covered only in local press, and one that for whatever reason gets international coverage.  The only way to know this, is to participate regularly in AFD discussions on events in the news.  The language is not as clear as it could be. I don't know if you're relatively new to Wikipedia, New(ish) to AFD, or just new to AFD discussions re: events in the news.  Certainly new editors are welcome here, as everywhere on WP.  And, just fyi, it is entirely acceptable to withdraw an opinion or AFD nomination simply by writing that you have changed your mind after coming to understand the policy that applies.  Best, E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:41, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Per WP:DIVERSE, WP:INDEPTH and WP:RAPID. Rape, rape-murders is a burning political issue in India. This has drawn major national and international coverage (multiple media sources ran the story in Britain, Australia, the U.S., and other countries).  Moreover, the "boyfriend" has been arrested, and no crystal ball is required to see that this will generate further coverage.  WP:NOTABLENEWS "Notnews does not prohibit the creation of articles about current events that receives extended and in-depth news coverage."  and "Sometimes the exact long-lasting impact of a current event in the news will not be apparent, but common sense dictates that there will be an impact." Sources exist to expand article.  As per WP:RAPID, it is wiser to keep this, and revisit in a few months.E.M.Gregory (talk) 13:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I nominated this for deletion a month after the event when I saw no edits being made to the page and no coverage in the media. If you notice, other than a news spike around 8-10 March, there doesn't seem to be any further coverage of this incident. I would be glad if someone could point out further coverage of this incident to me. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 15:00, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Just added one. I suspect there are more out there, I didn't do a lot of searching, and of, course the trial will generate coverage.  Here's my news google search:, as a shortcut for other editors asessing this. E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:03, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I searched about the incident extensively and was unable to find more than 2 links (there are quite a few false positives as there have been multiple cases where a girl has been raped and set on fire). If I order the news coverage by date, I can only see this one link on 25 March and another editorial referencing the event (on searching with these keywords) . I just feel that if this was indeed an important case, at least the 2 widely read newspapers in India Hindustan Times and The Times of India should have continued covering it, which is clearly not the case here. You can contrast this with another incident that happened on 30 March (in which a girl was raped and later set herself on fire) which seems to be receiving continued coverage. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 02:11, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * We have to beware searches, which vary by geography and other factors, and keep WP:NOTTEMPORARY and WP:OTHERSTUFF in mind. That said, I'm not arguing that this is the most notorious rape murder ever, just that the coverage passes WP:GNG.  There were authored (not mere reprints of wire soties) stories in papers worldwide, see:  [],,  a large public funeral  official denialism [], and more.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Per WP:DIVERSE, WP:INDEPTH and WP:RAPID. Good research by E.M Gregory.BabbaQ (talk) 18:13, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Given the public outrage in India over this issue, the sheer size of India, and the number of widely covered and arguably notable rape cases that occur there every year, I would support moving this page to a title such as Notable rape cases in India, 2016 and encouraging editors to Merge all most the most extraordinarily notable cases to it.  What say, User:Lemongirl942, User:AusLondonder?E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:14, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that would be a great solution! I noticed that there are multiple cases which are notable and it would be easier to organise them under a single article. (There is an existing article Rape_in_India where some cases are mentioned, but it would be preferable to organise them by year like you said). Of course, major cases could always be split off later to their own articles. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Exactly as you say. It will make a better, more useful article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:08, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I also just noticed this Articles for deletion/Scarlett Keeling about another case. I'm quite surprised this was deleted considering that it seems to be generating coverage even in 2016. Perhaps it was deleted because of WP:BIO1E. Cases like these can be added as well. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 18:48, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting considering this could be closed as Keep (including if I vote as such) but I'm still not confident about this being comfortable Kept thus I'm relisting for better attention. SwisterTwister  talk  05:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SwisterTwister   talk  05:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete perhaps and Draft if needed as I'm still questionable this being a solidly acceptable article after the fact. SwisterTwister   talk  05:40, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   14:27, 23 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to Rape in India for the time being. I like E.M.Gregory's idea of creating a new compilation article, but since it doesn't exist yet, I don't see any reason these few lines can't be merged to the main page for now and split off when need be.  AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 10:57, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete or Merge to Rape in India for the time being. RAPID is somwhat contradicted by CRYSTAL, we cannot see yet whether this event is going to be notable in its own right. If merged, it is anyway more useful to someone interested in the general topic, rather than this specific incident, to 'collate' the phenomenon within a context.Pincrete (talk) 17:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge and Redirect per reasoning outlined by and .  While we are WP:NOTNEWS, there is international coverage, and is part of a bigger picture as noted above.  This DOES belong on Wikipedia, but I don't feel it warrants it's own article (yet, at least). Chrisw80 (talk) 22:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.