Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The murder of Sophie Collombet


 * 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 keep. Keep !voters have provided plenty of evidence. Clear consensus to keep. (non-admin closure) w umbolo   ^^^  21:29, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

The murder of Sophie Collombet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unremarkable crime TheLongTone (talk) 13:50, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Sometimes there are more to these articles, but at the moment it fails WP:GNG, unless it improves I support the deletion. I don't want to be rude but the rationale could of been written better. Govvy (talk) 15:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 28 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Two relevant book hits - Palgrave-Macmillan and this more common audience book. In depth coverage of various aspects - e.g. Sophie Collombet: How many walked past the dying student?. Coverage has a wide WP:GEOSCOPE - beyond national Australian (which would suffice), also French,, and UK.. Coverage is WP:SUSTAINED - harking back to the event itself in 2014, through the court proceedings (e.g. 2015) and conviction in 2016. Furthermore, we have coverage showing WP:LASTING impact from 2017-2018 after the court proceedings concluded, including being mentioned as a notable event in other events.. This amply meets GNG, NEVENT, and NCRIME. Icewhiz (talk) 15:18, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, as User:Govvy notes, nom is cursory and gives no indication of WP:BEFORE, when even the quickest search on the victim's unique name brings up ONGOING, SIGCOV. And note that the issue at AfD is not whether someone regards a CRIME as "unremarkable."  The question here is whether there has been WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS, and in this case there has been.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:33, 3 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:GNG. and per book hits, and overall references.BabbaQ (talk) 23:23, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep The subject itself does not have to be intrinsically remarkable.  It needs to sufficiently referenced in reliable independent sources in non trivial ways, and with coverage over a number of years, nationally and internationally, it is.  There is also sufficient for some expansion of the article. Aoziwe (talk) 06:49, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:NOT. This crime will not have any WP:LASTING impact and is of no significance outside of Australia, thus failing WP:GEOSCOPE. If for some reason it is kept it should be moved to just Murder of Sophie Collombet. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 17:57, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest it has relevance outside of Australia in at least France. WP:LASTING is a presumption of notability.  The converse does not follow.  99.99% of horses, bands, sports people, etc., have no lasting impact.  Aoziwe (talk) 14:08, 6 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Whatever the proposer's life experience, this is a remarkable crime in the context of Brisbane. It occurred in a popular park in a very central part of the city and many passersby who failed to render the victim any assistance. I've added some cited commentary to that effect. Kerry (talk) 05:41, 7 October 2018 (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.