Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonelle Matthews


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:57, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Jonelle Matthews

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:NOTNEWS Comatmebro (talk) 02:31, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:57, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:58, 27 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:NOTNEWS #2: "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events." As with the disappearances of many children, there has been significant coverage over the years, including in 1985, 1989, 1991, 2010, 2015 and now 2019. I have added some references and some more information; more can be added (eg a reward was offered). RebeccaGreen (talk) 05:27, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. TheEditster (talk) 07:04, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per above - who are these puppets on wiki that call for obvious stuff to be silenced - I quote, "President Ronald Reagan mentioned Jonelle Matthews in a speech on March 7, 1985, in Room 450 of the Old Executive Office Building. She was mentioned in the Congressional Record for the United States House of Representatives on April 2, 1985, page 7224." as per the wiki article itself - who in their right mind would say that Reagan mentions her but we should just forget about it like it is came from some tabloid newspaper - patently ridiculous.--2600:8800:FF0E:1200:1962:B311:16B2:F79B (talk) 10:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * The article was nominated before that information was added.   Comfr (talk) 18:08, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * and taking a look at the 1st dotpoint of WP:GNG we read "Martin Walker's statement, in a newspaper article about Bill Clinton,[1] that "In high school, he was part of a jazz band called Three Blind Mice" is plainly a trivial mention of that band." so a mention in a speech by Reagan could also be deemed "trivial". Coolabahapple (talk) 05:24, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * the band isn't notable, Jonelle Matthews is. StonyBrook (talk) 06:06, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per RebeccaGreen above. PohranicniStraze (talk) 10:39, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sustained coverage over many years - meeting NCRIME/NEVENT. Icewhiz (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable event, per above Seacactus 13 (talk) 20:02, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment, i feel like Canute here ("your humility is astonishing coola, equating yourself with a king":)) but doesn't WP:BLP1E apply here ie. a low profile individual known for only one event that is not wikisignicant ie. someone who disappeared a long time ago whose remains has just been found? Coolabahapple (talk) 05:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think that WP:BLP1E is only for living people. And, although this AfD has the article name as "Jonelle Matthews", the name of the article is now Disappearance of Jonelle Matthews: it seems to have been moved just after it was nominated for deletion. So, the relevant policy would probably be WP:EVENTCRIT, and specifically WP:NCRIME, which says "As with other events, media coverage can confer notability on a high-profile criminal act, provided such coverage meets the above guidelines [depth and duration of coverage, and diversity of sources] 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." That's why I looked at the duration of the coverage; it's also in depth, from across the US, and from various sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:14, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * me bad, i will allow the tide of notability and consensus wash over me. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:21, 30 July 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep While this subject can be mistaken for NOTNEWS, it definitely isn't, since not all coverage is from this week; interest in this cold case has been sustained for decades, and now may finally have a chance to being solved, with all the resultant coverage that will generate. StonyBrook (talk) 06:06, 30 July 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.