Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disappearance of Jennifer Dulos


 * 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The result was Nomination withdrawn ergo speedy keep

Disappearance of Jennifer Dulos

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article should explain why this crime has encyclopedic value. Some crimes have encyclopedic value because of who the victim is, who the accused is or because whatever happened as a result. Not every crime that happens and is mentioned on the news has encyclopedic value in my opinion. Poveglia (talk) 03:00, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Withdrawn by nominator - I think we should not include everything that meets GNG but be more selective and that a tragic event that is mentioned in many sources but doesn't have much on a long term impact on those who are lucky enough to not be directly affected by it and is unfortunately not unique or rare should not be included. Other people prefer to include everything that meets GNG. OK. Poveglia (talk) 22:39, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Special thanks to, which it may not. Poveglia (talk) 22:39, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I prodded it, deprodded it using the editsummary: "additional sources seem to be rapidly becomingavailable--too soon to decide.". I'd argue that something is non-notable until it becomes notable. Poveglia (talk) 03:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Notability_(people) says: "The victim or person wrongly convicted, consistent with Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, had a large role within a well-documented historic event. The historic significance is indicated by persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources that devote significant attention to the individual's role." and that just isn't the case here. This is not an event of historic or encyclopedic significance and there is no persistent coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources. Poveglia (talk) 04:51, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

What_Wikipedia_is_not says: "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion. For example, routine news reporting of announcements, sports, or celebrities is not a sufficient basis for inclusion in the encyclopedia.". This event sure was newsworthy at the time but there is no enduring notability; its just routine news reporting. Poveglia (talk) 05:06, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep – Keep. This is a notable crime.  It's received national and international coverage.  Thanks.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:07, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * The article does not mention that national and international coverage. It contains just two sources. Any missing white woman will result in some press coverage, but there is no indication that this crime is worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia unlike thousands of similar crimes. Stuff like this happens every day. Poveglia (talk) 03:10, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I checked and according to Google there is no international coverage. Only some national coverage, and only for a short period of time. Poveglia (talk) 03:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, cuz I just started the article. As I am sure you know.  AND I put the "under construction" template at the top.  Which, I gather, you either did not see or simply chose to ignore.  Which?  Thanks.    Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries, if the event is notable it should take less than a minute to find a link on Google and copy-paste it into the article. Poveglia (talk) 03:16, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * (1.) Cover of ‘’People’’ Magazine.  (2.) Listed as “’’World News’’ “ here: .  How did your one-minute Google search miss all that?      Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:27, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Some guys "lifestyle news" blog is not exactly a great source. Greek City Times sounds like a newspaper you'd be able to buy in Athens but its just the name of a "lifestyle news" blog ran by 2 people in Sydney, Australia. Poveglia (talk) 03:29, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Sydney, Australia = international.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:33, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah the modus operandi of blogs like that is to regurgitate information found elsewhere in more reliable sources, hoping to bait clicks. Poveglia (talk) 03:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Not sure how that answered my very pointed question. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:17, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * This is an encyclopedia, not an indiscriminate collection of text, so the fact that an article is under construction (like every single article on Wikipedia, none of them are finished) does not mean we should store information about non-notable events. I don't have to judge notability based on the article, I can simply type her name into Google to see limited local coverage for a short period of time. Poveglia (talk) 03:21, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Articles start as stubs. Then. grow.  Or, did you think they just pop up in full form, out of nowhere, with no "work" or "construction"?  Unreal.  Bye.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:24, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * That is true in general. Not in this case because the event is not notable. We should get rid of this article before more time is wasted describing a non-notable event. Poveglia (talk) 03:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh, so you are the "final arbiter"? I was not aware.  I say it's notable; you say it ain't.  End of story.  Bye.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:29, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah the fact that you've refused to provide evidence for that claim, and that none can be found in the article, is why I nominated it. Poveglia (talk) 03:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Once again, I just started the article. And I listed it as "under construction".  Sorry that I don't work as fast as to your liking.  Get lost, dude.  Really. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:34, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * You could've posted some links here in the past 20 minutes... Poveglia (talk) 03:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Oh, yes, indeed. You right, Masta.  As I said above, sorry that I am not working as quickly as you REQUIRE me to.      Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:39, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I've read your talkpage and seen you respond like this to others. Are you sure that a collaborative environment like Wikipedia is the right one for you? Poveglia (talk) 03:46, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Listed as "World News": .  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If some Greek press reported on it because of the fact that one of the people involved is Greek that doesn't automatically make this worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. The husband is a Greek American. But I don't see what makes this crime special; why is so different about it from 8746358734685 other crimes committed in the past decade that this one should be included in an encyclopedia while the others are not. Poveglia (talk) 03:42, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Got ya. I see.  Called "moving the goal post".  Right?  First, you complain that there are no international sources.  Then, you complain that I am not providing you with info fast enough to your liking.   Then, as soon as I find exactly what you want -- an international source --  you come up with a brand new excuse.  Which basically amounts to "well, of course, this will be international news in Greece".  Again, after you were complaining about a lack of international sources.  So, again, moving the goal-post, when it suits your needs.  Done talking with you.  You're a joke.   Hard to take seriously.   Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:48, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Please re-read the stuff above, then compare it with your description of it. I'm sure you'll be able to find the discrepancies. Thank you, Poveglia (talk) 03:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment - as a disinterested observer, the dingdong above seems a bit unnecessary, this appears to be a developing news story and thus there are now more notable sources eg CNN and CBS NY which perhaps have not yet been taken into account. If there is an 'underconstruction' tag surely it would be good faith to assume these sources will be added, at the same time the article was created 3 days ago and only has two references at the moment so it definitely needs some work to justify the tag. If more sources are added, I would be inclined toward keep. Mujinga (talk) 12:26, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * There are a million sources. National and international.  Including the cover of People Magazine, and also Rolling Stone.   And -- I just found out -- a full-hour episode of the TV show Dateline (airing just last night).   These would eventually be added into the article.  I only started the article a day or two ago; I immediately slapped an "under construction" tag.  And, of course, five minutes after the brand new article is started, some one with a "trigger finger" puts it up for deletion.  A quick Google search will show dozens of sources, many local, many national.  Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:19, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * If sources that indicate a lasting notability and encyclopedic relevance are added I will also vote keep of course. Poveglia (talk) 13:08, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - A quick Google search shows that this story has been covered repeatedly by CNN, CBS New York, New York Post, Fox News, International Business Times, The Advocate, Yahoo! News, and the list goes on. Although the article may not be fleshed out, this appears to easily cross the bar of notability. May His Shadow Fall Upon You     Talk  13:48, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - In addition to my Keep vote above, I wanted to comment on some of the policies invoked in this discussion because I've found them to be commonly misunderstood. WP:CRIME does not require that the victim have a "large role in a historical event." WP:CRIME is concerned with whether the victim should have their own article, independent of the crime itself. Such a policy would be very relevant if the AfD was for Jennifer Dulos; but it's not. WP:CRIME is a more specific restatement of WP:BLP1E, which is another widely misunderstood policy. This does not address whether the crime should have an article; that's handled by WP:NCRIME. NCRIME states, in it's entirety, Articles about criminal acts, particularly those that fall within the category of "breaking news", are frequently the subject of deletion discussions. 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. I think this clearly meets NCRIME criteria as evidenced by abundant national-level coverage. May His Shadow Fall Upon You     Talk  13:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Many sources covering this including New York Times. Bus stop (talk) 15:22, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I believe the goal here is to write an encyclopedia, not a somewhat random collection of old news. If people disagree that's fine. If they agree then I would like them to explain what makes this crime worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. This isn't D. B. Cooper. Poveglia (talk) 17:17, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment: This is not "old news".  This happened in May 2019.  And it is still continuing and ongoing news.  And its coverage has also been continuous and ongoing.  If anything, the coverage has increased and expanded, as the story continues to grow and develop.  Thanks.     Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:25, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment: I just found out:  The TV show Dateline did a one-hour special episode about this case, also.   The show aired just last night!     Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 17:31, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Poveglia—you are mentioning the D. B. Cooper article. I think the comparison is the riddle wrapped up in an enigma aspect of both articles. We also have the Death of Elisa Lam article. I would guess we have other articles too that involve a severely unanswered question with the powerful implication of criminality. One important consideration involves the level of support in sources, but the Disappearance of Jennifer Dulos certainly attains some level of support in sources, so I am reluctant to reject the article's existence. Bus stop (talk) 18:03, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I thought it was kinda obvious who were responsible after reading the article. So to me it doesn't seem like much of a mystery. The D.B. Cooper case is a mystery that has been talked about for decades. I didn't know Elisa Lam's name, but I did remember her story after so many years. I checked Google News, sorted by recency, and there are recent articles that mention Elisa Lam and D.B. Cooper  It seems very unlikely that the disappearance of Jennifer Dulos will generate the same level of persistent coverage over the years (or decades in Cooper's case). Especially when the husband (and perhaps his girlfriend) get convicted, which is what I would assume the next chapter of this drama will be. I don't think its a much of a whodunnit when there are 2 people arrested on charges of tampering with evidence and hindering prosecution. Poveglia (talk) 18:15, 10 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Let me correct myself. There are mysteries involved in these cases. Some presumptions are strongly suspected. You make a valid point that it seems likely the husband will be convicted, although that remains an unknown at this time. But wouldn't there still be large mysteries such as why he would kill the mother of his 5 children? Or am I being too pollyannish? Reliable sources are closely following the case probably due to the enormity of the crime that is alleged to have transpired. We also have Watts family homicides. Bus stop (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I remember that story too, and when I looked on Google News (sorted by recency) I noticed someone wrote an article about them yesterday. That is 393 days after the event. It seems unlikely that this disappearance will receive the same persistent coverage. If and when the husband is convicted it will be case closed so to speak. I do think we should have an article on Mike the Headless Chicken because there is persistent coverage over a long period of time in multiple sources. For the future generations our article about Mike will have more value than an article about some random murder (let's be honest, its extremely unlikely that she is going to be found alive and well) that happened a long long time ago. Poveglia (talk) 21:25, 10 September 2019 (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.

Updates
Update: January 10, 2020. This case has only increased in notability (and coverage), over the past half-year or so. We made the "right call" above. The nomination "deserved" to be withdrawn. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 18:17, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Another Update: May 21, 2021. The State of Connecticut is close to passing a "Jennifers' Law", in response to this case. See: "Jennifers' Law" receives near unanimous support in state Senate. Source: ]. Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 02:40, 22 May 2021 (UTC)