Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bei Bei Shuai


 * 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   snow keep, closing this AfD extra early because the article is on DYK right now. It's really unfair to the writer(s) of this article that it gets AfD'd whilst on the front page. This nom couldn't wait a couple hours? -- Y not? 13:20, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Bei Bei Shuai

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This is a pretty clear-cut WP:BLP1E to me... but I could be wrong. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:07, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. The case itself is certainly notable, and certainly ought to be covered in Wikipedia. Wikipedia policy in murder/attempted murder cases is normally to have the article at Murder of (victim name) - as it's the case that's notable, not the person - but as the 'victim' in this case had no name, that's not possible . Mogism (talk) 09:18, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Slight correction to my above comment, as the unborn child did have a name, but Murder of Angel Shuai is clearly inappropriate as a title, since the whole point of the article is that most people don't consider death in these circumstances to be murder. Mogism (talk) 09:25, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that this would be an inappropriate title because Bei Bei Shuai has not been convicted for murder. But our articles are not supposed to have a "point", and I hope that this one doesn't read as having one.  Sandstein   09:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * By "point" I didn't mean to say you were 'taking sides'. What makes this significant isn't the "did she do it?" that is normally the issue in disputed murder cases, but that it's a case where nobody disputes the facts of what happened, but there's vast difference on whether people consider it a crime. I guess the closest equivalents would be some of the landmark sodomy or free-speech cases, where nobody disputed the facts but there was huge disagreement on whether a crime had taken place and if so, what the crime actually was. Mogism (talk) 09:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep The notability for the article is clearly articulated in the Legal context section. Now, I do think a rename would be appropriate, but I am just as perplexed as Mogism on what it could possibly be changed to. Maybe the full court case name? Bei Bei Shuai vs. State of Indiana? Silver  seren C 09:22, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, as creator. I considered BLP1E, but the policy says: "The significance of an event or individual is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." In this case, the murder charge was the subject of substantial coverage in leading international newspapers (notably, The Guardian) both when Shuai was jailed and now, a year later, when she was released and again when the prosecution sought to suppress some of her lawyer's activities. In addition, it is clear from the coverage that this case is not reported because of its human interest element, as e.g. a grisly homicide or celebrity prosecution would be, but because of the novelty of the charge and its implications for pregnant women across the U.S. These elements illustrate why this person and her case are likely to be of lasting significance beyond the fact of being reported in the news. As to the title, I think most readers will look for the case under the woman's name, because the formal case name doesn't seem to have been publicized much. – Note: The article is currently on the main page as part of WP:DYK.  Sandstein   09:26, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * What about Bei Bei Shuai case as a title? That makes it clear that it's an article about a case, not a biography, but still means people typing the name into the search bar will be taken to it. By making it explicitly about the case, it also prevents people adding irrelevant other detail about her life, which would otherwise be expected in a biography. Mogism (talk) 09:33, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * You probably mean Case of Bei Bei Shuai? Meh, it's possible, but an argument can be made that the reporting is not only about her legal case but also about her as a person, e.g., her history and identity as a Chinese immigrant. In such cases, I find it more congenial to present the topic in the form of a biography, but that can change depending on what the focus of subsequent coverage is.  Sandstein   09:37, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. The case raises some judicial questions about the US or Indiana justice system that are certainly notable. Also some social ones like the said creeping criminalisation of pregnancy across America. The case itself and the fact that it is prosecuted at all is notable. So is the suppression of the lawyers activities that could be construed as worrisome. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 10:02, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I find the focus of media (including wikipedia) on pregnancy issues exaggerated and that that on American legislation unbalanced but something that raised so much holler on the international press deserves at least a pseudostub. I am ferociously opposed to copypasting all the related legal material in the article, but that's another matter.complainer (talk) 10:36, 19 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is certainly enough notability. It might be more appropriate to name the article for the court case - but there hasn't been a court case yet. Maproom (talk) 13:13, 19 July 2012 (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.