Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Destiny Norton disappearance


 * 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--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Destiny Norton disappearance

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

While this is certainly a sad incident, it isn't clear how this is more notable than hundreds of other murders each year. The article doesn't establish why it is notable enough for retention. Wildhartlivie (talk) 02:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. No reliable sources found that weren't directly tied to the incident. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 02:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Can you clarify that, TPH? No reliable sources found that weren't directly tied to the incident. Wouldn't all news sources re: the disappearance be directly tied, or am I missing something? TravellingCari  02:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * What I mean is, if you search for the names of the people, the only relevant hits tie right into this incident. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 03:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Got it, thanks. For some reason I misunderstood your comment as 'if you search on the murder, you find hits on the murder' and that's why I was confused. I agree that she wasn't notable prior to disappearing and if she hadn't, we'd never have heard of her, but the same probably applies for Natalee Holloway, Elizabeth Smart, Madeline McCann or Jon Benet Ramsey as well as Adam Walsh. While the latter is special because he spawned a TV show and this does border on an OSE argument, I think we have enough consensus on en.wiki that these people are notable. Not that I personally agree, but I really really would like to see something resembling consiststency in AfDs. That said, the article does need some clean-up but that can be easily fixed. TravellingCari  12:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * This is a good point. Maybe news reports of an event should be considered primary sources? Northwestgnome (talk) 03:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Disagree news reports from reliable sources are a core part of WP:V unless they're written by someone with an immediate connection, they'e clear secondary sources, which is part of why I don't understand TPH's vote yet. TravellingCari  03:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete A single crime, no matter how evil, is not notable by WP standards. Northwestgnome (talk) 03:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment not that I completely disagree, but consensus proves otherwise. Murder of Jaidyn Leskie, Eve Carson, Tim McLean and Articles for deletion/Isabella Nardoni case off the top of my head, and I know there are many others. I think some crimes are notable but not all, I'm undecided here. TravellingCari  03:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some murders and surrounding circumstances are notable and some aren't. This murder obviously is notable. Before we explain why, let me first set the record stragiht: She churns out almost 10,000 ghits. Take away 5,000 because ghits aren't conclusive.....You're left 5,000. She is notable. As for why her murder became notable while other murders did not: She was six-year old at the time of the murder; as the article states - huge search teams in the community went out to search for her; the  Mormon community historically has a very low crime rate. These are some of the factors that made this murder notable over other murders. -- brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 03:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - The number of g-hits doesn't actually matter. What matters is that attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed per WP:DEL. In other words, if there are 100,000 g-hits but we have not found reliable sources, it should be deleted, if I understand the guidelines right :) - Samuel   Tan  19:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment really? I found more than 100 in 30 seconds all from newspapers and other sources that seem to meet reliable source guidelines. You're telling me you found none whatsoever? TravellingCari  20:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * No, he didn't say that at all. He was just commenting on the validity of ghits in general. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yup that's what I was doing; thanks, Wildhartlivie. *hands out a cookie* :) - Samuel  Tan  03:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment. This article is the result of a merge between Craig Roger Gregerson and Destiny Norton. The former has already survived an afd even prior to the merge. See Articles for deletion/Craig Roger Gregerson-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 03:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The keep on the AfD on Gregerson occurred shortly after the girl was murdered, over two years ago, and was undoubtedly a germane case at the time. What I don't see in googling is an ongoing high profile status of this event, or some legislative or societal effect from the case. Outside of the fact that this was a tragic murder, the article does not assert the notability of the murder, even if it was a huge community search in a Mormon town. When you eliminate "blog", "wiki", "wordpress", "forum" and "blogspot" from the google search, the gross number of hits drops to just a bit over 2700, some of which are duplicates, and the majority of which are from the time of the murder. I'm not unsympathetic (or in fact unempathetic) to the murder of a child or its short term local newsworthiness, however beyond the time frame surrounding the case, what continues to make it notable? In the examples given by TravellingCari, three of those cases are new and even ongoing, at least one of which is fairly sensational. However, once they fade from current news, will they continue to have a notable effect? The fourth, Jaidyn Leskie, has resulted in activism by the mother and a constant presence with a kit being released to assist in choosing babysitters. Wildhartlivie (talk) 04:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. A legislative or societal effect is not prerequisite to notability.  Substantial coverage in reliable sources is a pre and end requisite to notability, and this case easily meets that criteria.  I'm not saying that it didn't have a societal effect on its community.  As a matter of fact, it probably did.  The very fact that it was covered so substantially is prima facie evidence of a societal effect.
 * The elimination of a few thousand links is unfair. The fact that this case was so widely discussed in blogs and forums is proof of notability. And besides, 2700 ghits is nothing to sneeze at.  -- brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 04:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I won't keep arguing this. However, I have a real issue with articles covering victims of crimes in this way that don't have wide-ranging effects. There are so many, and on a local level, murders, especially grisly ones or those that effect children, tend to get a larger measure of local news coverage. Unless they result in publication or coverage beyond the time and scope of the event, I am not convinced they are notable. A situation in point would be the majority of victims from the Columbine massacre. Some have articles, at least those whose individual deaths had effects after the event (Cassie Bernall, Rachel Scott, for example), but the rest don't. The argument that blog and forum discussions indicate notability doesn't hold in my view, since they aren't considered notable for purposes of sourcing. But in any case, I don't believe the article, as it currently stands, establishes notability. Right now, it is little more than a news item and needs to be expanded in order to show notability in the article. Brewcrewer's arguments here do that far beyond what the article itself does. Wildhartlivie (talk) 15:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article meets the requirements for WP:Notability (criminal acts).Nrswanson (talk) 06:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Do we use proposed policies and guidelines as criteria when they haven't yet been accepted? I am wholly supportive of the institution of notability guidelines in these criminal and victim biographies. It's an issue that needs addressing. Wildhartlivie (talk) 15:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment sometimes, WP:SCHOOLS is one often used although I see its now noted as failed, as is WP:FOOTYN. Ideally none should be used as an absolute, but rather as a basis. We're never going to have total uniformity. TravellingCari  15:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 10:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions.   —• Gene93k (talk) 10:31, 8 August 2008 (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.