Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Gilham

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:37, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffrey Gilham[edit]

Person notable for one event. Also violates Wikipedia is not a newspaper. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 12:28, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete- Media coverage only due to his crime. WP:NOTNEWS. PirateSmackK (talk) 17:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep There is sufficient coverage for verifiability. WP:BLP states"If the event is significant, and/or if the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate article for the person may be appropriate. Individuals notable for well-documented events [...] fit into this category." This is certainly well documented; look at all the sources. This is a well written article and I see no reason to delete it. — Jake Wartenberg 18:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The key portion of your WP:BLP extract is "if the event is significant". Mr. Gilham is accused of mudering his parents. While this story may be tragic, and such tragedies often inspire a great deal of press at the time, it is hardly significant on a global scale (or should we start adding articles about ALL patricides?). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why not, if there is sufficient press coverage? You may have ignored the last bit there, "Individuals notable for well-documented events [...] fit into this category." — Jake Wartenberg 23:09, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 01:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, textbook case of WP:BLP1E. While this event was undoubtedly significant to the victims' family and friends, it's not significant enough in the grand scheme of things to justify a separate article. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:38, 24 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Move and re-work into an article such as Gilham family murders, consistent with current practice to reflect the event and not the individual. WWGB (talk) 06:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but move per WWGB. Good idea. Lonelygirl16 (talk) 10:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BLP1E and NOT#NEWS. Jake misunderstands the section of BLP he's quoted. An example of a significant event is a presidential assassination. A kid killing his parents is not what is meant there. لenna vecia 03:36, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.