Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheila Davalloo


 * 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. -Scottywong | talk _ 14:11, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Sheila Davalloo

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This article is about the perpetrator of a crime, possibly two, but neither the criminal acts, the perpetrator or victim have notability. There are also only 6 references given, only one of which is active. BashBrannigan (talk) 13:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:32, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:36, 5 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. At this time, she is suspect of one murder, and has been demonstrated to have committed one - against her late husband.  So for all intents, we have WP:ONEEVENT.  Given the deactivation of the other links, I'd have to lean on no. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 06:02, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - passes wp:gng per source.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:11, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete No, read WP:GNG . It says "a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." but goes on to explain, "Presumed" means that significant coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion. Editors may reach a consensus that although a topic meets this criterion, it is not appropriate for a stand-alone article." I contend it fails as as criteria for inclusion because, From Wikipedia is not a newspaper:
 * "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events. While news coverage can be useful source material for encyclopedic topics, most newsworthy events do not qualify for inclusion." What is enduring about this murder? I see nothing particularly unusual, nor does the articles single source give anything. BashBrannigan (talk) 05:34, 13 May 2012 (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.