Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Whitney Heichel


 * 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. Consens seems clear. Similar outcomes vary, but i think most of those with only this degree of coverage now get deleted. My own personal opinion might be different in some cases.  DGG ( talk ) 22:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Murder of Whitney Heichel

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tragic but not notable murder....William 20:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions....William 20:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions....William 20:06, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:46, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a crime blotter or collection of stories of true crime-and-punishment. My condolences to the friends and family of the victim. Carrite (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - per international coverage. I say give the article creator a chance to improve the article further and add more info and even more reliable refs then right now. Good work so far.--BabbaQ (talk) 23:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Question. What international news? The article's sources are not international and oh yes it was in the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail is a tabloid newspaper and WP:SENSATION reads "Tabloid or yellow journalism is usually considered a poor basis for an encyclopedia article, due to the lack of fact checking inherent in sensationalist and scandal mongering news reporting." Another source for the article is the New York Daily News whose editor freely says 'we are a tabloid newspaper....William 00:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Although the Daily Mail is a tabloid newspaper in format (as opposed to broadsheet), it is not a 'tabloid' newspaper in the way that WP:SENSATION means. So it does count as a reliable source.Videomaniac29 (talk) 05:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Perhaps the article should be renamed to be about the killer who was also involved in child porn? Candleabracadabra (talk) 13:00, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS as all coverage is routine and no evidence of lasting impact.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 19:42, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per past similar outcomes. Ongoing, international and national coverage. Bearian (talk) 18:42, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment What ongoing coverage? Google news shows nothing for 30 days. Coverage of this story is routine except and the rest of the coverage is the tabloid media. Young lady gets abducted and murdered. Happens everyday is tragic but tell me one think notable about this one?...William 23:35, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:46, 26 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete WP does not 'do' murders unless there is something about them to render them encyclopaedic. With good reasons - there are a great many of them. Some do receive media coverage, usually because they are female, white and young. The nature of current media is that the stories may be hosted anywhere in the world - the Mail Online boasts a big international reach and concentrates especially on targeting a female audience, for whom stories such as this may have a special and morbid fascination. There still needs to be a good reason for including them in Wikipedia, as there is in some cases, but I am not seeing evidence of it here. --AJHingston (talk) 11:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Expanding upon my comment at the top, this piece runs afoul of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The incident, while tragic, is not of lasting historical or cultural significance. Coverage is of the nature of routine news for crime-and-punishment. Carrite (talk) 16:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Per AJHingston's and WilliamJE's resonings. MrScorch6200 (talk) 16:41, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and AJHingston. This is tragic and regrettable but has no long-term or encyclopedic significance. JohnCD (talk) 15:27, 5 October 2013 (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.