Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marissa DeVault


 * 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 speedy keep per WP:SK. Nomination withdrawn with no outstanding delete votes. (non-admin closure) • Gene93k (talk) 01:48, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Marissa DeVault

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This person only appears to be notable in connection to a single event. VQuakr (talk) 03:27, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - Virtually all crime articles are single event deals unless it's a celebrity who commits the crime, so that aspect is not really relevant, imo. Either wikipedia covers crime articles or it doesn't. Applying the single event rule to articles this type of article would wipe out almost all crime articles, so that justification doesn't really work. This case has gotten a decent amount of press. On that front I'd say it's marginal, but the murder weapon used is unusual. You don't hear about hammer deaths all that often. I think it meets notability.Bali88 (talk) 04:20, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Blunt weapons are 4% of the total. This is not a crime article, it is a biography of a convict (though in my opinion the crime is not notable as an event, either). VQuakr (talk) 05:15, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: For the record, I would be cool with renaming it to Murder of Dale Harrell. I don't live in Arizona and I've heard of it, so it's getting coverage. However, I didn't know her name and all I knew the murder as the "hammer murder" because that's how they keep referring to it. It seems more appropriate to frame it on the murder. Bali88 (talk) 13:11, 16 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment: I'd probably recommend that if this is kept, it get a name change to Murder of Dale Harrell. DeVault did cause the death but the coverage is by large about the murder and trial of Harrell as opposed to the woman herself. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:07, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and move. The coverage outside of Arizona is fairly light, but it is there. The Daily Mail covered it, as did Good Morning America. I consider the DM to be as reliable as a leaky bucket but GMA is usable as a reliable source. (The DM is still considered usable by a good portion of editors, so it should be considered as well, I guess.) HLN also covered the murder to some extent, so that could help push the argument for national coverage as well. The murder and subsequent trial does appear to be notable, so this is why I'm endorsing a move to Murder of Dale Harrell per naming conventions. Even the Jodi Arias trial redirects to Murder of Travis Alexander. Generally speaking, people convicted or suspected of murder don't get separate articles unless the coverage focuses predominantly and specifically on them, either pre or post trial. Luka Magnotta is a good example of the type of coverage we'd need in a typical case. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   08:14, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. There's extensive coverage from the Associated Press, such as this story.  There's also coverage at CNN, including some wildly sensationalistic transcripts.  I'm not exactly thrilled about this article's prospects, but it does seem at at least arguably notable.  I agree that the article should be renamed.  If the event receives no further coverage or diversity of sources, I suppose we can always come back here and debate it again based on WP:EVENT.  I'm sympathetic to the nominator's concerns, but there's a bit too much coverage for me to vote to delete. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:43, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I still am on the fence regarding this subject's notability, but given the emerging consensus above my initial nomination may be considered Withdrawn for the purposes of WP:SPEEDYKEEP. No need to keep this open for a week as far as I am concerned. Suggest we relocate the move discussion to the article talk page. VQuakr (talk) 19:34, 16 May 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.