Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Murnaghan


 * 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. --BDD (talk) 18:59, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Sarah Murnaghan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be a biography of a person known for only one event. Even in question appears to be a standard human interest story in which a exemption was made, and appears to have little chance of either resulting in a) any changes in circumstances or regulations or b) any lasting notability. Terri Schiavo she ain't. Sceptre (talk) 17:49, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I removed the speedy tag as there was sufficient coverage for it not to be speedied. Whilst BLP1E may apply to the girl, the court case itself maybe significant. Judges overruling the medical profession on medical matters, not the first time, but this case is different as it alters the waiting lists for other patients as well. If this case leads to more court cases, or a change in the waiting list system, then it will be worthy of an article, but that is WP:CRYSTALL.Martin 4 5 1  (talk) 21:47, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 15 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. The court case/decision is notable, but notability is not inherited. -- Scray (talk) 04:13, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete It's possible an article could be written about the court case, presumably titled in the standard X-vs-Y format for court cases, if it proves to have long-lasting effect. There should absolutely not be a biographical article about this child; it violates her privacy as wall as WP:NOTNEWS. --MelanieN (talk) 20:57, 18 June 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.