Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Jay Slater

Death of Jay Slater

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

This seems like a prime example of NOTNEWS to me; there is no indication that this is an event that rises to encyclopedic notability, and the history is replete with the removal of excessive tabloid-style detail and suggestion. Pinging the three editors that weighed in at WP:BLPN: notwally, Bon courage, DeCausa. Drmies (talk) 16:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete for the reason you've given: WP:NOTNEWS and WP:1E. There has been a decent amount of news coverage in local weeks but he's now been confirmed as having died via misadventure that's likely to drop off very quickly now and it's not even WP:VICTIM. Fragglet (talk) 16:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:00, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Drmies and Fragglet. A classic news aggregator piece unsuitable for an encyclopedia. I fear that this is shouting in the wind - we have too many articles like this so I'll be very surprised if Delete succeeds. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS exists but the multiple other articles of this standard lowers the subliminal threshold. DeCausa (talk) 17:33, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is just passing grief porn of no lasting encyclopedic worth. No knowledge to share here, no decent analytical sourcing and Wikipedia is (or should be) WP:NOTNEWS. Bon courage (talk) 17:50, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * wrong wrong wrong 78.145.76.106 (talk) 18:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:52, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: isn't this article similar to that of Death of Nicola Bulley?... iirc, that was also nominated to be deleted?, but was kept... – 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 L1amw90 (🗣️ talk to me  • ✍️ contribs) 20:38, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * User:L1amw90, there seems to be a lot more content in that article than in this one, particularly content pointing to a greater influence, for instance. Drmies (talk) 21:44, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That article contains a substantial amount of information about the police investigation and subsequent investigations into possible police misconduct during the case. Is there any indication that this situation has broader signficance beyond news coverage of a missing person who had accidentally died? – notwally (talk) 03:04, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree with Drmies and Fragglet. What is the encyclopedic importance or enduring notability of this article subject? To document a flash of news coverage surrounding one person's death? Almost all of the article seems like trivial details. We already ignore WP:NOTNEWS too much when it comes to news reports on crimes, and I don't think it is wise to extend that to accidental deaths as well. – notwally (talk) 21:35, 16 July 2024
 * Keep and not just because I started the original article, Disappearance of Jay Slater, but because I agree with L1amw90. There are many articles similar to this one which are still on Wikipedia. CitationIsNeeded (talk) 22:49, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
 * CitationIsNeeded, please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. Drmies (talk) 01:52, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep There are many articles like this on Wikipedia such as, Death of Nicola Bulley which was going to be deleted however was kept even though its in the same boat as this article as not having "encyclopedic notability", also why delete the article just because the search is over? If thats the case then that means many other missing persons pages should be deleted aswell due to that reason, and I can agree with you that tabloid journalists have milked the story and most likely in 2 weeks will be posting articles along the lines of "Jay Slater's mother uses gofundme money on booze!", ok i sidetracked a bit TLDR: Keep because there are many other articles similar to this that went thru nomination for deletion but are still up. User:IPhoneRoots 11:06, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a reason to keep an article, especially an accidental fatal fall. Clarityfiend (talk) 13:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I would lean towards Keep as the coverage of this disappearance, death and the public reaction to it has been extensive to the point where it now feels like its entered the cultural lexicon. If it turns out coverage is not WP:NSUSTAINED then it may be delete-worthy in the future but I expect it will be the type of case that gets referred back to and compared to a lot. Orange sticker (talk) 13:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep the article is very similar to the Death of Nicola Bulley. And his death is trending all around social media. Azarctic (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * That other article is substantially about the investigation into police misconduct. Is there anything similar for the article subject here that involves details beyond merely the accidental death of a person? I do not see anything in the article in its current state to suggest that is the case. – notwally (talk) 15:03, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Guardia Civil had to pretend they stopped searching to deter vloggers. Darrelljon (talk) 09:35, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Yup, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. I've experienced both stories from a UK media perspective. At the end of the day, it's just a sad case of someone having an accident in the mountains and the difficulties of finding them therein. Rightfully a media story at the time, at least at this time, there's no long lasting impact or public story, or anything extraordinary about it. Negatives outweigh the positives. Delete. RIP Jay. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:50, 17 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep - This was a huge case that went on national news every day until the case was resolved. Nicola Bulley, Madeline Mcann articles are still up. Makes zero sense to delete this in my opinion. R.I.P Jay Slater. Jattlife121 (talk) 21:36, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Although "huge" and appearing "every day" in the news (at least in reliable sources) may be questionable hyperbole there's no denying it was a big news story in the UK. But it would be interesting to see the arguments of keep voters! as to how WP:RECENT media coverage equates to needing a WP:NOTNEWS encyclopaedia article. An encyclopedia and a colection of news clippings are not the same thing. The keepers don't seem to address that: specifically could someone talk through the 10 year test thought experiment in relation to this article. DeCausa (talk) 22:05, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think one thing is that the story has (unfortunately) moved outside of news coverage and into meme culture and maybe even urban mythology. I'm not inclined to go looking for links though because they're all in pretty bad taste. I doubt this story will go away quickly - multiple stories are still being published in the last 24 hours. As it says in WP:RAPID, we shouldn't rush to create articles but also shouldn't rush to delete them. I would just advise a pause on this one. Orange sticker (talk) 08:10, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep - we have similar articles with extensive news coverage on deaths from exposure/misadventure/wilderness etc. including
 * Deaths of Kris Kremers and Lisanne Froon
 * Yuba County Five
 * Death Valley Germans
 * Death of Azaria Chamberlain
 * Dyatlov Pass incident
 * Darrelljon (talk) 22:54, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Are those similar though? All of them seem to be unsolved or were unsolved for a long period of time with sources from different decades, and/or had investigations into the police handling the cases. Does this particular article subject have any remarkable aspect about it as a case other than temporary news coverage? – notwally (talk) 03:30, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Only Jay Slater made video calls whilst lost and disappeared with smartphone geographic coordinates available from early on. Unlike the others he was not camping/hiking/driving at night. The others were not subject to the social media reaction from the start. Darrelljon (talk) 09:18, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete All the coverage is sensational. Though we can see some major newspaper contributing to the topic, I can’t see how it fulfils WP:SIGCOV. Therefore, subject fails WP:1E Vorann Gencov (talk) 00:07, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment this is paywalled, but a new article about the reaction around this case came out this morning. I think the social media section could be expanded. https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2024/07/jay-slater-our-true-crime-poisoned-culture Orange sticker (talk) 08:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Added it to the social media section, thanks for the suggestion. Bonus Person (talk) 02:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep - the incident has had far too extensive media coverage to warrant a deletion Kala7992 (talk) 16:03, 18 July 2024 (UTC)


 * delete this case is nothing but news, and WP:sensationalism. Feels like gender reversed incident of missing white woman syndrome. Nothing different, or notable about this garden variety missing/death case. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep. I'd !vote to delete were it not for the New Statesman article provided by Orange sticker, which indicates use as a WP:CASESTUDY. With that said, the keep rationales of, , , , and are probably subject to being invalidated, because the existence of articles about other disappearances  is not relevant to whether this disappearance is notable.  The big ugly alien  ( talk ) 02:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep, quite similar in notability to Death of Nicola Bulley and a BBC News about the subject was posted today. Sahaib (talk) 08:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep, as per Sahaib, it is wholly similar to the case of Nicola Bulley which was nominated for deletion twice for not having encyclopedic notability and a keep was resulted for both. Her death was an accidental drowning and Slater's was an accidental fall - both died in accidental circumstances. The rationale as per her deletion discussion was "An accidental death by drowning is a non event, not worthy of a WP article", but a Keep was resulted nonetheless. Rejecting WP:OTHERSTUFF and WP:NOTNEWS as per rationale for this, Jay Slater's case dominated the British media and social media, in particular the spread of the conspiracy theories. Yes, WP is not a newspaper but the constant coverage, not least in Britain but across the world too, perspicuously provides for proof of notability and bestows readers with WP:LASTING impact. ABC, Reuters, CNN, NY Times, TVNZ, RTÉ. Notability is WP:NOTTEMPORARY and this satisfies WP:GNG. Yes countless people go missing every year, but few disappear without trace and generate the media attention to worldwide extent. Most certainly reject that it is a WP:1E case. Though his body has been found and a court rules accidental fall, I wholly reject that this case is "likely to drop off very quickly" with sustained coverage still being reported here, here, here and here a week since his confirmed death. However, just to note I feel the article itself could be improved, such as adding a background section as seen here (if there is enough reliable sources to cover). Edl-irishboy (talk) 14:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete Most of the cases raised by Darrelljon have had some kind of afterlife, an imprint on the culture. This is not true of this case. Darkfrog24 (talk) 23:23, 21 July 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep, as per all above. This is very similar to the case of Nicola Bulley, who coincidentally were both from the Lancashire area. I’m not sure why Nicola’s article is still up and Jay’s is proposed for deletion but Jay Slater’s case has gained media attention worldwide and is notable to be on Wikipedia in my opinion. There are so many missing person’s articles on here which are similar, so why delete this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23EE:1300:259E:2037:382A:EADD:9BD (talk) 02:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)