Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dalia Harir


 * 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 ~ Anthony  14:16, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Dalia Harir

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

no notable achievement. One of 142 murder victims in her district in the year of her deathProudlyhumble07 08:45, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete WP is not a memorial. The killer doesn't even have an article, yet one of his many victims do? TJ Spyke 08:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per likely WP:POINT nomination without prejudice for future AfD. -- Charlene 10:59, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * keep per news coverage . Meets WP:BIO. --W.marsh 15:32, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete- I disagree that she meets the critera of WP:BIO- she is only in the news as part of the murder- and is not notable in herself. Thunderwing 15:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * By this logic we'd need to delete articles like Natalee Holloway. At any rate that's more an argument to merge to an article on the murder, than to delete. Since the murder meets inclusion standards. --W.marsh 15:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Some murders do generate significant coverage, although I can't yet see that this case has. Has this murder received significant coverage in the United States? Thunderwing 15:57, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Does it matter? WP:BIO only specifies multiple. We would have to restrict ourselves to covering only the most-reported murders if Wikipedia had a space limitation, but it does not. --W.marsh 15:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:BIO does not require significant coverage in the United States. WP:BIO does not require that even one American has heard of it. WP:BIO does not even require the existence of the United States. This is a huge pet peeve of mine: American coverage does NOT make a subject more notable than coverage in other countries, and coverage in other countries is equally as acceptable in proving notability as coverage by American sources. -- Charlene 20:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I do point out that there might perhaps be some differentiation in this respect in terms of coverage only in non English sources for people not living or connected with an English speaking country--just a suggestion, I'm not the least bit sure about it. This to some extent the practice, but only because of the interests of editors.   DGG 04:37, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - It meets our minimum requirements. John Vandenberg 18:04, 24 April 2007 (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.