Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anene Booysen


 * 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   no consensus. Perhaps allowing a few additional weeks for this to settle will make its notability easier to gauge. ‑Scottywong | communicate _ 23:06, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Anene Booysen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete per WP:NOTNEWS, WP:BIO1E, WP:CRIME, WP:EVENT ukexpat (talk) 17:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The crime is horrific, and it is covered by newspapers, rightly so, as such.  However, this horrific crime does not appear to have risen above the level of basic news coverage, and as such, I don't know that it will have lasting impact beyond the current news cycle.  If, in the future, there is significant ongoing analysis of this particular crime, then no prejudice towards recreating then.  But this is too soon to make that judgement on an event such as this right now.  It is only with the passage of time to provide perspective necessary to decide if this crime raises to the level of analysis and coverage as one would expect of a Wikipedia article.  -- Jayron  32  19:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Keep: broad worldwide media coverage. Reason for the actual southafrican "BlackFriday"-campaign. Gets more coverage and notability in connection with the Reeva Steenkamp-case too. --Wistula (talk) 11:58, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 16 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - world coverage. seems to have recieved attention beyond a basic news coverage per Reeva Steenkamp and BlackFriday campaign. Even the SA president has made comments about it. --BabbaQ (talk) 18:21, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:02, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - this crime seems to have received enough attention from the international media to be more than a run-of-the-mill event. In any case, I think the argument made by Jayron32 above is backwards - it's too soon to make the judgement that this crime was non-notable. As we don't know how things will turn out, we should assume it may be historically significant and only delete it later if it proves not to be, rather than deleting it now and have to recreate it later. Robofish (talk) 00:32, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll add that I do think the article should probably be renamed to be about the event rather than the person, along the lines of 2012 Delhi gang rape, since it's not a biography. Robofish (talk) 00:36, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with a renaming.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:07, 17 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. If this "BlackFriday"-thing is really so notable, you need to write about that. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 05:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTNEWS (if moved) and WP:ONEEVENT. If it's "too soon" to determine its impact, then the article was also obviously created too soon, and it should be deleted, incubated or userified until such time as the impact and merit for inclusion can be properly assessed. § FreeRangeFrog croak 07:31, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - The importance of the Anene Booysen case to the South African public is comparable to well known American cases of violence against vulnerable members of society, e.g. the case of Emmett Till. This deletion request is very premature. I don't think we can call something not notable after it was written about in, amongst many others, The New York Times and The Guardian and while the story is still developing. Raymond Ellis 08:42, 23 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Ellis (talk • contribs)
 * Emmett Till??? Your assessment of historical importance is premature... Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 09:16, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Given the horrific gender violence issue in South Africa, this is on a par. I find your comment uninformed. Raymond Ellis 20:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Ellis (talk • contribs)
 * You have no clue what you're talking about, unless you have a crystal ball for 2035. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 20:20, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I just don't want an innocent person consigned to the dustheap because we did not care (I did not know her). She is important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Ellis (talk • contribs) 20:32, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTMEMORIAL Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 20:45, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have found, because WP is policy driven, you can always find a rule that works; what ethical rule drives your to delete this page? ( I can thing of one, but you have not raised it) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Ellis (talk • contribs) 21:43, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete-Supported by references but has nothing to be a notable and looks better as news only. ---zeeyanketu discutez 19:01, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
 * nothing to be a notable, there was a United Nations condemnation of this crime! Raymond Ellis 19:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymond Ellis (talk • contribs)


 * Keep for now, per WP:VICTIM; it's too soon to assess the subject's historic significance (although I sympathize with the horrific nature of the crime).  Mini  apolis  21:18, 25 February 2013 (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.