Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Jennifer Alfonso


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Death of Jennifer Alfonso

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This newsworthy event does not meet the inclusion policy; the article does not demonstrate or make any claim that it will a precedent or catalyst for something else of lasting significance It received news coverage because it was a news story, but the event has no significant impact over a wide region, domain, or widespread societal group. There has been no in-depth coverage analysis that puts events into context by any of the sources, only routine news reporting.  LGA talk  edits   09:27, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 12:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:NOTNEWS.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 13:17, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - As the creator of the article, Please note that the article is not created due to WP:BREAKING, but rather due to WP:CRIME and due to the unprecedented nature of the confession of the crime. There is no claim of WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS here when I state that Wikipedia may not be news but the Wikipedia does contain such records of such unprecedented events (if there was precedence of such events it wouldn't have formed the headlines as a domestic violence shooting is not a first or uncommon in USA). There is no question of notability here nor I notice any one mentioning it either. I will leave it for the community to decide on the deletion. Also if I may suggest that this article be not deleted as per WP:RAPID.  A m i t  웃  16:13, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Do you have a source for the claim of a "unprecedented nature of the confession", the article does not mention it ? As for WP:RAPID it says "it is recommended to delay the nomination for a few days" which is exactly what happened.  LGA talk  edits   20:21, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have already explained in my same comment why I mention it to be unprecedented, why do you feel it is not unprecedented kind of confession - is confessing by posting a dead body on facebook very common? Yes WP:RAPID means not deleting the article right away but instead letting it mature a little bit before taking the action(that too is admin discretion based on reason). When I say don't delete, i mean the same, I put the link for the policy so that it can be read and appropriate action be taken accordingly and so that I don't have to explain the whole stuff in my comment.  A m i t  웃  01:43, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Though tragic, such domestic violence killings are far too common. In the 20th century, the distraught killer might call a friend to confess. This guy posted a photo on Facebook. Pathetic, but not worthy of an encyclopedia article.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  17:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree that murders are extremely common and therefore most murders may not be notable for inclusion on Wikipedia. However, the way in which this murder came to light by posting images on facebook (a very popular social site), the husbands profession as an actor, and as an author of books that are suppose to help people deal with emotions by proper communication (which apparently he is not very good at), may in fact make this a more notable subject for an article in the future. This is a fairly new event as well, and it is hard to tell at this point in time whether it will truly be a notable topic. There does appear to be many reliable sources out there discussing this murder vs. the many murders that occur that have hardly any news coverage. I am thinking that it will be a notable event. Tattoodwaitress ♥ LetsTalk 18:44, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:CRYSTAL with "might be notable". If for some reason this case stays on the news and have an impact on the judicial system or Facebook lets say, then the article could be recreated without a problem. Secret account 20:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: I see no compelling evidence that the murder will become notable for inclusion in its own article, but WP:RAPID and the high number of available sources sway me for now. Tezero (talk) 20:17, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Local news story only getting national relevance due to the Facebook upload. Let's not reward this guy's infamy by allowing him the 'honor' of having this death take up space here, which is what I'm sure he wanted to make a point.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 21:28, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - the case is too new for me to judge its notability, one way or the other. Bearian (talk) 17:43, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete The only thing that sets this murder apart from other murders is the posting pictures on his wife dead body on Facebook, thus the media incident. If it wasn't for that, it would get just a minor bleep on the local news sources for a few days (Miami media is probably the worst in the United States when sensationalizing murders and other victims of crime). As there is an extremely unlikely impact on this and coverage is starting to die out, WP:NOTNEWS applies. Also unprecedented isn't a reason for keeping an article as its only a POV. Secret account 20:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Lots of sources, but nothing to indicate any lasting notability. If such notability occurs, the article can be recreated. StuartDouglas (talk) 16:08, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - after a read through yesterday and after a check of coverage I find this article subject to be sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:38, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Cullen328 and Secret. --BDD (talk) 22:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per Secret. Too much WP:RECENTISM too. A tragic domestic homicide but these happen all the time....William 18:02, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. Longer term WP:EFFECT is unknown at present. If coverage in reliable sources is sustained/revisited over time then there's no need to recreate the content again, which could potentially be undeleted via Deletion review at that time. -- Trevj (talk) 08:59, 21 August 2013 (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.