Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disappearance of Hannah Graham


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 22:40, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Disappearance of Hannah Graham

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No indication that this event is of lasting importance as outlined at WP:LASTING. VQuakr (talk) 06:24, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the nominator, many people around the world disappear each year and some of the disappearances attract attention of the media and the general public. However, as an encyclopedia, we cannot and should not cover all the stories unless they prove to be of special significance. --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 09:17, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  17:11, 20 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete Defiantly agree; not a lasting story. Buzzards-Watch Me Work (talk) 18:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:20, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:21, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * comment We have an article on another missing white woman case from the same city: Morgan Dana Harrington. The sourcing and coverage are similar, and thus the notability of the two articles should be similar.  Sailsbystars (talk) 01:31, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF. VQuakr (talk) 02:45, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete' Or just include it as part of the list at the bottom of Missing_white_woman_syndrome — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:4300:11A2:D0:FA0B:B268:2781 (talk) 05:34, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Or start deleting most of the articles in categories like Missing person cases by decade. Sources are solid and include the likes of CNN, USA Today, and ABC.
 * Moreover this nomination seems to ignore that the Notability (events) guideline basically says an article's notability depends on the event in question. While its satisfaction of WP:LASTING could be debated, like many of the articles in the cited category, based on the tone of coverage it certainly fits the circumstances stated in WP:N/CA. I'd support moving it to the Missing White Woman Syndrome article, if there are sources calling this situation such a case. Anynobody(?) 19:55, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Incubate for two weeks, WP:NPASR This is too soon to determine notability.  This has received ongoing national coverage, although I don't know why.  Currently it violates WP:NOT#NEWSPAPER.  Unscintillating (talk) 00:52, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Plenty of sources to indicate notability. Everyking (talk) 10:57, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment copied from the talk page I would say hold off on deleting for a brief period of time (2-4 weeks). Any relatively significant disappearance (and or foul play which is likely) can constitute some historical news, at least for the immediate area. I live in the D.C. area this is extremely notable event in the news now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.0.40.66 (talk) 2014-09-22T11:56:05
 * 23:15, 22 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - I have to agree with Unscintillating. See also Missing white female syndrome.  I saw this on CNN over the weekend, and it made me sick for so many reasons: another college student gone missing and possibly assaulted, the sensationalistic media, the invasion of privacy, blaming the victim, convicting persons of interest before even being arrested, etc. Bearian (talk) 13:05, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. Has caused a great deal of media attention and is very well sourced, making it hard to argue that it's any less notable than most of the other 59 pages at Category:2000s missing person cases and Category:2010s missing person cases. The case is unfolding in a nearly-identical way to Murder of Brianna Denison, which, in hindsight, has proven to be a valuable resource for people wanting to write about the case (i.e., one of the primary purposes of an encyclopedia). These cases do tend to have lasting effects, as they tend to lead to changes in laws, policies, and practices where they happen. KarakasaObake (talk) 17:11, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
 * NamUS contains 18,000 missing persons cases, and that is for the United States alone. The argument should not be "look at these other 59", but "look at these other 17,900." VQuakr (talk) 02:18, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The obvious difference between the 59 pages we have, and the 17,900 pages we don't, is that the 59 pages are for cases that were the subject of significant media interest, which invariably led to a a large, organized search; a widespread feeling of fear in the area; candlelight vigils; etc. It's the reaction to the disappearance that makes it notable. I feel like this is akin to an argument that we shouldn't have an article on The Rape of the Lock because there are a hundred million poems we don't have pages for, and besides, people get their hair cut all the time. KarakasaObake (talk) 19:26, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * We have different inclusion criteria for literature than for events. WP:NEVENT does not mention vigils, search parties, or feelings of fear and for good reason - there are many, many more than 59 vigils per decade worldwide. VQuakr (talk) 20:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * No, WP:NEVENT doesn't mention vigils or search parties, but it does mention depth of coverage, duration of coverage, and diversity of sources, all of which this case has. And, quoting directly from WP:NEVENT: "As with other events, media coverage can confer notability on a high-profile criminal act, provided such coverage meets the above guidelines and those regarding reliable sources. The disappearance of a person would fall under this guideline if law enforcement agencies deemed it likely to have been caused by criminal conduct, regardless of whether a perpetrator is identified or charged. If a matter is deemed notable, and to be a likely crime, the article should remain even if it is subsequently found that no crime occurred (e.g., the Runaway bride case) since that would not make the matter less notable." KarakasaObake (talk) 23:30, 24 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "NamUS contains 18,000 missing persons cases...." I don't see the relevance of those 18,000. the majority of them have not been shown to be suspected or charged abductions as this case has.108.18.74.119 (talk) 00:38, 25 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Looking over other notable crimes listed here, and especially noting the very strong reaction at UVA, it is more than notable.108.18.74.119 (talk) 00:35, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete As others have noted, this is an essentially unremarkable disappearance; many happen every year. For people close to UVA or who otherwise feel particular kinship to this young woman, this may seem callous, but fundamentally, in ten years, regardless of outcome, no one is likely to care about this at all. To editors pointing out similarly trivial articles, please remember WP:OTHERSTUFF -- editors like myself in favor of deleting this article would probably be in favor of deleting all your similar examples for the same reasons, but this discussion is limited to this article. If we needed to put all vaguely similar content on trial everytime we had a deletion discussion we'd never get anywhere.


 * The only way that I might consider this article notable and keep-worthy is if, somewhere along the line, the reason for her disappearance turns out to be especially notable -- abducted by aliens, or ISIS, or something similarly unlikely. I don't see any point in keeping the article around until that notability is established, however -- it can always be resurrected if it turns out that something truly distinguishes this girl from all the other missing persons cases out there that by luck or tragedy don't get the same kind of media coverage.Eniagrom (talk) 10:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)

*Weak Keep for now. It has the intense and widespread coverage similar to other Missing White Female cases which have been found to be notable in AFDs. Obviously one cannot use the time machine to travel to the future and see how lasting the effects and coverage were. We could revisit in a couple of years and delete it if the coverage fades quickly. It should not be added to the Missing White Female Syndrome article unless reliable sources call it an instance of such disproportionate coverage. So far I do not see such linkage in the news coverage. Edison (talk) 12:34, 25 September 2014 (UTC) 
 * Notability isn't the same as interesting or weird or whatever. The case doesn't become more or less notable depending on who kidnapped her; it is more or less notable depending on how important people think it is and how much attention they give it. Everyking (talk) 02:51, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete (changed from Weak Keep). It is a news story, and this is an encyclopedia, not "Top Stories Of The Week." If the case becomes as notable as the killing of Bobby Franks by Leopold and Loeb, if laws are passed as a result ("Hannah's Law"), if it is discussed in legal textbooks, if books and movies (like "In Cold Blood" ) are written about it, or if there is a notable and precedent-setting trial, then we can create an encyclopedic article. Not every hyped story needs a permanent entry in encyclopedias. Edison (talk) 15:41, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Normally you can read an encyclopedic treatment of the "top stories of the week" on Wikipedia. Normally nobody even considers nominating such articles for deletion. You can trivialize anything&mdash;"another missing white girl"&mdash;but if the world thinks it's important, that's all that matters. Everyking (talk) 02:51, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete It has not been established that this case is anything more than a routine news story. Yes, it is getting a lot of coverage but the suspect was arrested yesterday, so that is sort of expected. There is nothing interesting about this case (especially now that there has been an arrest) that is going to hold the public's interest outside of the immediate area. Laladoodle92 (talk) 13:02, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, at least for now. It is too soon to decide if there is WP:PERSISTENCE; however for a current event it seems widely discussed enough to be probably notable, meeting WP:DEPTH. It seems to meet the second point of WP:EVENTCRIT very well, in other words.-- cyclopia speak! 16:33, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Of course, a lot of people disappear and their disappearance never become notable, but a few do. Whether we agree with whether their disappearance should have been widely covered, really doesn't matter. I don't know why her disappearance has received such persistent coverage, but it has.  WP:DEPTH has been met and WP:PERSISTENCE is now met, though that wasn't clear when the article was nominated, but it is now. I am One of Many (talk) 02:18, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Has very large amounts of coverage, and as noted lots of article about disappearances and such exist 71.197.6.193 (talk) 19:02, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep This is big news story that is getting international coverage due to the fact that the missing person is a UK citizen. Possible connection to other unsolved disappearances and murders of young women in the area over the past several years.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.50.125.47 (talk) 22:33, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - seem to get over the notability threshold by WP:CRIME.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:37, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and per WP:NOTNEWS -  Cwobeel   (talk)  23:58, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * There has been a majority of votes recently in favour of keeping the article so I'd like some more discussion regarding whether this article should be deleted or kept given the current level of media coverage.
 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:22, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

 — Berean Hunter   (talk)  17:27, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep for now. Give the dust a few weeks to settle. VMS Mosaic (talk) 09:06, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Things have just changed and a positive connection has been made between the suspect in this case and the Morgan Dana Harrington case and the 2004 Fairfax rape. The notability of these subjects are intertwined.
 * Delete as it is just a news story. Not worthy of an encyclopedia page. Ksoth (talk) 20:13, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - The case has continuously been a major news story since it was first announced that she was missing. While it is too soon to judge if WP:LASTING will be met, that is only one section of the larger Notability (events), which suggests even events without lasting effect might be notable if they receive significant coverage.  Furthermore, the latest news reports indicate a connection to the disappearance and murder of Morgan Dana Harrington.  That case has already received significant coverage over several years, and if the two are connected, the combined topic would certainly be notable. Calathan (talk) 20:39, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - For the reason that Calathan said. Illegal Operation (talk) 00:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - per my comments above, that this story is still in the news, and that it may be connected to a serial killer. Bearian (talk) 00:52, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - per the reason given by Calathan rkmlai (talk) 06:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - While the serial killer connection is indeed interesting, I'd like to point out that it reduces the notability of Hannah Graham's disappearance as warranting its own article. Should it turn out that she was killed or otherwise targetted by an at-large serial killer who has had other victims, the likely result of that would be a merger of all articles relating to the individual victims to a page on the serial killer or his killing spree. As such, this article would be an even stronger candidate for deletion (or at the very least, redirection), along with, if appropriate, Morgan Dana Harrington.Eniagrom (talk) 08:52, 1 October 2014 (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.