Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diana O'Brien


 * 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.  Sandstein  18:59, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Diana O'Brien
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Does not seem to have been notable as a model, or for any other reason, prior to her death. Her murder also does not seem to be exceptional so, although there has been extensive press coverage, I believe that the article falls foul of WP:BIO1E. TigerShark (talk) 16:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. I am, however, somewhat of an inclusionist and open to be being convinced otherwise. - House of Scandal (talk) 19:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment/Weak Keep . The death is recent, and news coverage is ongoing, so it may have other repercussions. I think we can wait a bit. If nothing else comes of it, this may be a classic example of WP:ONEEVENT. Ray Yang (talk) 21:20, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't think that this is a valid reason to keep the article. We don't have articles for people or events that may become notable, and we don't keep existing ones in case they do become notable. If the person or a related event becomes notable in future an article can easily be created/re-created then. TigerShark (talk) 22:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Question. The guideline is to "cover the event, not the person." In this case, I don't believe we have an article on the event, which is certainly of some note. Should we move the article instead? RayAYang (talk) 03:03, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * If that was done, what do you think makes the event itself notable? Cheers TigerShark (talk) 19:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Hah. Good point. As time passes, I really do begin to think this was a 5 days wonder. Changed my mind to Delete. I'm thickheaded, but data gets through eventually, I hope. RayAYang (talk) 04:14, 16 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep/Comment. When I started the page, I was hesitant for the reasons more or less expressed above. I was a little taken aback by the reporting style in the local press which made me decide to give it a go. That's not how the press here in Turkey reacts when a "guest" of this order is subjected to an attack (the solution then is generally a question of timing, as here. The more so if the attack is of a lethal and/or sexual nature (the latter is not the case here apparently, I am distancing myself from my point...). As per Ray Yang I should say let's keep it for the moment. A suspect is arrested and then he confessed. She was preparing to leave for Yunnan and then the murder, with theft as motive, occurred. Still, the page is among the top hits when you google "Diana O'Brien". I would say, let's wait awhile. Cretanforever (talk) 15:37, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand the reasoning. Are you saying that she is notable, or are you saying let's wait to see if she becomes notable. If it is the latter, then that is not a valid reason to keep. We need to discuss how this article complies with the notability requirement. TigerShark (talk) 15:47, 13 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - as an individual, the subject is not notable, and as a news item, it's currently a news item with no indication of lasting impact or coverage -- Whpq (talk) 14:08, 15 July 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.