Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Bothuell V


 * 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 keep but move back to Disappearance of Charles Bothuell V which was the original title of this article. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 16:12, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Charles Bothuell V

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Alleged to be csd eligible on db-person grounds, however I think an afd here may be a better approach to the article. While the event in question does make the person seem ineligable on WP:ONEEVENT grounds, the overall incident may be more notable, in which case this article could be folded into a broader subject covering the investigation in general as opposed to the person specifically. To do that, though, we need community input. TomStar81 (Talk) 11:20, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 *  Keep, or Retitle to Disappearance of Charles Bothuell V - While Bothuell himself might not be notable, I feel that his disappearance is notable. I started an article at Disappearance of Charles Bothuell V, but after it got moved, I chose my battles and left the article at that title. --Jax 0677 (talk) 19:27, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 *  Comment - IFF the article cannot be kept, it should be redirected to 2015_in_the_United_States per WP:CHEAP. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:29, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 18 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment I have a feeling that when the second trial is over, this may turn out to have been a storm in a teacup. There is coverage, but what I see on Google looks to be somewhat sensationalist, and not a vast amount at that. I feel that the dismissal of the torture case should be mentioned right now, as without that, the article is not up to date and liable to be regarded as biased. On the whole, while the case has its peculiarities - and there may have been two conflicting agendas at work - I think that BLP1E does come in, and that possibly we may need a new policy BLP1NE with the N standing for 'non'. Peridon (talk) 23:31, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I've added the dismissal of the torture charge. Peridon (talk) 10:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. Not sure. If kept, it should be renamed as Jax 0677 has suggested. When things like this make it into People, it suggests that there is some notability, or at least interest, beyond what we would considered routine news coverage. - Location (talk) 09:07, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 *  Keep  - and rename per suggestions above. I see no reason for deletion. Per GNG.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:57, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Rename - Per Jax 0677. The person is not notable, but the disappearance sure is at the moment. DisuseKid (talk) 02:15, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Rename to Disappearance of Charles Bothuell V. Bothuell is not notable, the crime and related trial are notable. Still, living in Metro-Detroit I may be biased to think this is bigger than it is.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:12, 26 July 2015 (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.