Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ashley Kirilow


 * 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   delete.  — fetch ·  comms   18:09, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Ashley Kirilow

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete Non-notable petty criminal. One single newspaper article doesn't make someone notable. Burpelson AFB (talk) 03:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Actually I beg to differ: this case has been followed by a fairly large media reaction (not including online reactions) in Canada. Maybe it's not such a big thing in the US or something. Anyways, there's much more work needed to be done on this article, [|read this first please], the page was only created like 5 minutes ago, lol. Children of the dragon (talk) 04:00, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Wikipedia presents articles on individuals considering their enduring level of notability. As such, WP is not the place for routine news reports of criminal activity. Cindamuse (talk) 05:02, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:48, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Also, WP:BLP1E. Burpelson AFB (talk) 22:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * This comment exposes serious reasons why blp1e should be deprecated. First, blp1e gives no guidance as to what should and shouldn't be an event.  In my experiences these judgments as to what does and doesn't constitute a single event are very highly subjective.  In my experience nominators frequently conflate multiple events, when they are unsympathetic to the subject, or doubt their credibility.  Second, blp1e allows for exceptions.  I suggest it is not events that should count -- it should be topics.  There is no single topic that our coverage of Kirilow could be merged to.  (1) The psychiatrist who first described Munchausen syndrome by internet described Kirilow as an example.  (2) Some charities pay for granting terminal patients a dying wish, and Kirilow had a "dying wish" to visit Disneyworld sponsored by one of those charities.  (3) Kirilow's fraud is having a chilling effect on charities attempts to seek online donations.  These three topics could all benefit from referring to Kirilow's case.  Merging the information we have on Kirilow into articles on the three topics I mentioned, or to any other topic, wouldn't be helpful.  Most of the information would be off-topic there, and it would make it hard to find.  It would be particularly hard to find for anyone interested in Kirilow's connection to the other topics.  Looking back on all the instances where an individual was a blp1e, and we kept the article about them anyhow, those individuals were related to multiple other topics, like Kirilow, so there was no single related article where the information could be merged.  Geo Swan (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. She's had her 15 minutes of infamy, and most everyone has already lost interest. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, this quickly stopped being a local story. Geo Swan (talk) 23:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * mirror
 * Keep -- We don't normally carry articles on individuals who are known for a single event, and then forgotten. We do cover individuals who rose to prominence from a single event, where their participating in the event takes on a life of its own.  IMO, we should cover individuals who do not end up being forgotten,  even if initially they were only known for one event.  Consider coverage like that in the following reference.  That article is not about the event of Kirilow's fraud.  That article is about charities efforts to raise donations online, and how it will be effected by Kirilow's fraud.  That article establishes that Kirilow's fraud has gone beyond blp1e, because its effect on charities' online donation efforts is a whole other topic.  Some readers reading articles like this one are going to be curious about Kirilow, want more background than that offered here.  Will they look to the wikipedia in vain for this coverage due to an overly strict interpretation of blp1e?  Geo Swan (talk) 21:19, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
 * mirror
 * Delete for the reasons given. Eeekster (talk) 01:45, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:BLP1E is clear: "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." This means that this event can be covered in the context of an article about scams against charities, even if that article has yet to be written, but not as a BLP.  Sandstein   07:51, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. A clear BLP1E case; this is not a biography, it is story about her misdeeds. If that event is notable, that is the article we should have. However, I am unconvinced as to the lasting notability even of the underlying event, hence, I favor deletion rather than rewriting the article. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  14:44, 20 August 2010 (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.