Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Russell (criminal)


 * 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. Looking different than the average serial killer is not unusual or substantial enough to balance out WP:N/CA and WP:BLP. Glass  Cobra  03:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

George Russell (criminal)

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

WP:BLP1E criminal, otherwise non-notable.  MBisanz  talk 05:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - In most cases, a serial killer is notable for one event - being a serial killer. See Category:American serial killers. George Russell has received sufficient coverage (see Ghits here), coverage in multiple books on serial killers and some scholarly works . In addition, he was cited as the example of how the demographic profile of serial killers changed in the 1990s, which is beyond the crime itself and does therefore meet WP:N/CA. There is no valid reason to delete this. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * He doesn't pass N/CA.  MBisanz  talk 05:55, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - I personally think this article is as worthy of inclusion, if not more so, as other such articles as Constance Fisher and Caroline Grills, which are little more than stubs. And yet, these articles have not been nominated for deletion (nor should they be); if you delete this article because you think it does not fit inclusion categories, it logically follows that you should delete these as well. Treybien 12:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Keep in mind that, while we do strive for consistency, the existence of other articles is not very relevant to this discussion. The notability of the subject is what is being questioned. — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  23:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * keep Notable for both coverage and as an example of the changing demographics of serial killers(and explicitly cited as a notable example of that in the article). JoshuaZ (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * JoshuaZ: We don't keep things because they are examples of how to write things. Delete per WP:BLP1E ++Lar: t/c 04:13, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, what? Where did I say we did? JoshuaZ (talk) 04:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per BLP1E. لenna  vecia  15:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per Lara and Lar. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:33, 29 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.