Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siti Aisyah


 * 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 redirect to Kim Jong-nam. A merge request may be asked for and done after a talk-page consensus. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 06:40, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Siti Aisyah

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article is about a person accused of taking part in a serious crime, but not so far found guilty. The crime is notable, but Siti Aisyah as an individual is not, as sources discuss her only in relation to the crime. The article needs to be either deleted or turned into a redirect to Kim Jong-nam, as previously happened to the Đoàn Thị Hương article. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * At the very least redirect. Why would we delete it outright when it's a plausible search term?, what is wrong with the plan: throw any relevant categories into the redirect, move sources to the main article, and keep this? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:55, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry,, I don't see exactly what you are suggesting. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:43, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Right now, Siti Aisyah is an article. I think that it is a reasonable search term (for instance, I searched for it here!). If we delete it, then there will just be a redlink--how is that helpful to anyone? It will also just encourage someone to remake it. Instead, replace the article's contents with Kim_Jong-nam#Death, move all of the information from the current article there, and keep the categories that are on the page (such as Category:1992 births) for navigation purposes. Don't you agree that this is a better option than deletion? ―Justin ( koavf ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:54, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * As I said at the outset, I see nothing wrong with a redirect. Nor would there be any problem relocating relevant material from this article to Kim Jong-nam. I don't care about the categories. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 04:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep or Merge. No compliance with WP:Before. Tons of articles around the world on her involvement.  And even though this is a single incident, it has international interest and implications.  Deleting this is like deleting Lee Harvey Oswald, who was a loner involved in a single incident.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 13:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * I can understand a merge, but not keep. There is undoubtedly plenty of coverage on Siti Aisyah's alleged involvement in the murder of Kim Jong-nam (we have to be careful here as she has not yet been convicted) but the coverage only deals with her alleged participation in the crime, it is not really coverage of her as an individual. She is hardly the equivalent of Lee Harvey Oswald. She is more like her alleged accomplice Đoàn Thị Hương, whose article was turned into a redirect with no objections. Can you suggest any reason why Siti Aisyah would be more deserving of an article than Đoàn Thị Hương? FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 20:08, 9 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge She is a key figure in an important event so I would oppose deleting the article completely, but at the same time I don't think she in notable independently of the murder of Kim Jong Nam. To me the obvious thing to do would be to merge this article with Kim Jong-Nam and have it redirect to the section about his death. Imalawyer (talk) 06:53, 11 March 2017 (UTC) CU-blocked sock.  Winged Blades Godric 06:38, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:36, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - OK sources, the article subject seems notable enough per WP:GNG. and WP:CRIME.BabbaQ (talk) 16:06, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * What is your evidence that the sources are about Siti Aisyah as an individual, as opposed to being about a crime in which she allegedly took part? And why would Siti Aisyah be more deserving of an article than Đoàn Thị Hương? Per WP:EVENT: "People known only in connection with one event should generally not have an article written about them." If you want to make a convincing case for keeping the article, BabbaQ, then please show just what else Siti Aisyah is known for. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 21:09, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  00:17, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Malaysia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:17, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:27, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  06:20, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment If consensus cannot be found to keep the article, I believe it would be humane and only sensible to turn it into a redirect. It is undesirable to have an article about a living person who is not genuinely notable, especially when the only reason they are in the news is their alleged participation in a crime. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 01:08, 27 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Kim_Jong-nam (with history preserved). I am strongly against an immediate merger without an explicit talk page consensus. The subject is not notable beyond the incident and we are not supposed to create a separate article. There are massive BLP concerns at play here. I also do not like the information in the article, which is why I am against a merge. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 09:03, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge to Kim_Jong-nam or related. WP:ONEEVENT failure at stand-alone notability. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:47, 28 March 2017 (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.