Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edith McAlinden


 * 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   Move. Move  MBisanz  talk 00:50, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Edith McAlinden

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

This article about a murderer fails BLP1E and WP:NOT. The event in question, a triple murder, has only recieved sensational rather than encyclopedic coverage, which is required per WP:NOT. That policy states that ''Wikipedia considers the historical notability of persons and events...Even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Unless news coverage of an individual goes beyond the context of a single event, our coverage of that individual should be limited to the article about that event, in proportion to their importance to the overall topic.'' The article itself reads like a newspaper clipping, as it only states sensationalist facts and does not analyze the importance of the person in relation with the rest of the world. I haven't found any sources to adequately document her in an encyclopedic manner. Furthermore, this article violates WP:BLP1E, which states ''Wikipedia is not a newspaper. The bare fact that someone has been in the news does not in itself imply that they should be the subject of an encyclopedia entry...If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted. Marginal biographies on people with no independent notability can give undue weight to the events in the context of the individual, create redundancy and additional maintenance overhead, and cause problems for our neutral point of view policy. In such cases, a merge of the information and a redirect of the person's name to the event article are usually the better options. Cover the event, not the person.'' Per both of these policies, this article should be deleted.  Them From  Space  02:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak move to House of Blood murders and rewrite to cover the event. It seems the event has been a recurring item in the news, and as such probably meets the "historical notability" threshold. 2004, 2005, 2008 (More in Gnews) Note: I'm pretty neutral on this, since the news coverage sounds rather like a tabloid and not encyclopedic (See NOT). — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  05:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  05:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  05:06, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Move & Re-write as per LinguistAtLarge. This article is primarily concerned with the event rather than the individual and, as such, displays tendencies to mislead. I would argue that the event may be notable but its individual participants are not. Eddie.willers (talk) 14:23, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Move as suggested Triple murders are notable, but the article needs to be written appropriately. Fortunately, there is a good title to use. When I came here 2.5 yerrs ago the consensus seemed to be just shifting into the position that single murders were not notable, but double ones were. I think we now expect a higher body count. DGG (talk) 09:25, 15 April 2009 (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.