Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perfect crime


 * 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  k eep. - Mailer Diablo 17:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Perfect crime

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No relevant references; article is speculative with no verifiable information. Gingerwiki 02:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete; Original research and speculation. It's a crime where the criminal doesn't get caught, what else is there to say? Masaruemoto 04:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep The article contains a reference to a BBC documentary on the subject.  The reasons provided in the proposal are therefore incorrect.  Colonel Warden 05:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Please don't vote "speedy keep" unless you really mean that the nomination was in bad faith or an obvious misunderstanding. It isn't an intensifier. --Dhartung | Talk 06:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I say what I mean and mean what I say. Since the article contained a reference already to a work of the BBC's science/fact dept, the stated reason for deletion is voided. Colonel Warden 11:10, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Apologies; I on the other hand didn't say exactly what I meant. The article does contain a reference. What I was trying to get across is that most of the content of the article is more conversational than encyclopedic. The first sentence is a useful definition, but the rest doesn't say much. Should it be a Wictionary entry?Gingerwiki 00:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep, plenty has been written about this beginning with Leopold and Loeb (which the article doesn't mention, oddly). Certainly it's a major fictional device. --Dhartung | Talk 06:03, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, very notable topic. Current reference is already good and many more surely can be found here. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The nomination is... less than intelligent. Mikael GRizzly 14:12, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete - the article as it stands is virtually all original research - the nomination is certainly legitimate. I think there's room for an article here on the idea of "the perfect crime" as a meme or theme in detective fiction and popular culture, and the article cites two sources in that direction, but the current text of the article is a short OR essay or meditation on perfect crimes, not encyclopedic. Llajwa 18:46, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm not even a mystery or murder fan, and I'm still familiar with the idea of the perfect crime and its siblings the locked-room mystery. I could easily imagine looking this up and expecting to find it; it's a disservice to the reader to not include such an article (which considerations convince me this is quite notable). --Gwern (contribs) 19:24 26 October 2007 (GMT)
 * Keep Article needs more comprehensive treatment, with sources. jonathon 05:05, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Granted, the article is in shambles right now, but that's certainly no justifiable reason to just eliminate the entire thing. Given the proper work, this could become quite an extensive piece and collection of information. Anthony Hit me up... 00:31, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. Subject is certainly notable and article simply needs improving via regular editing. Benjiboi 05:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * weak Keep blah —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.220.107.109 (talk) 21:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep &mdash; Definitely a notable and interesting topic. &mdash; EliasAlucard|Talk 16:53 31 Oct, 2007 (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.