Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keli Lane

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. . She is not notable as an athlete; being accused of murder is not notable, either. Being convicted of a particularly notable murder that attracts wide public attention mightwell be reason for an article, but before conviction I've never closed against the apparent majority before, but it's a matter for do no harm--and BLP trumps other considerations, If convicted, do no harm might well not be applicable, so if that happens, at that point, rewrite and reinstate. DGG ( talk ) 04:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keli Lane[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No lasting encyclopedic value in this WP:BLP article. Mattinbgn (talk) 12:21, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- Mattinbgn (talk) 12:22, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There's certainly a lot of sensational press about her, and the alleged murder of her child. Many of the reports report her as a champion water polo player. For example, [1], and [2]. [3] notes that her intention was to be part of the water polo team at the Sydney Olympics. So there is some indication that she may meet WP:ATHLETE with respect to notability. -- Whpq (talk) 13:30, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak keep in line with the guideline at WP:BREAKING. I've searched around the best I can and I do not think this subject currently passes WP:ATHLETE or WP:EVENT, however, I cannot help but think there would be a large number of "keep" recommendations if she were an American. Given that she is in the middle of a well publicized trial in Australia, I am inclined to take a wait and see approach to "breaking news" articles. Location (talk) 20:12, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - After a lot of digging around, as best as I can determine for WP:ATHLETE, this establishes that she was a member of a silver medal team at the Junior World Championships for water polo. Although a commendable accomplishment, that's not an indication that she is competing at the top level of her sport. So from the point of view of athletic accomplishments, she does not meet notability. On the other hand, coverage about her alleged crime has been noted by multiple major Australian dailies over a sustained period of time. I've found coverage from 2004 through to the present which demonstrates that this has transcended just being another news item. -- Whpq (talk) 13:43, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it seems clear from the above that she does not meet WP:ATHLETE, and the murder trial is a pretty clear case of WP:BLP1E in my opinion, no matter how many papers it has been in. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 07:18, 28 August 2010 (UTC).[reply]
- Comment - BLP1E includes the qualifier that "the significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." The coverage spanning literally years demonstrates that coverage has been quite persistent. -- Whpq (talk) 10:58, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Quite so. If BLP1E were applied literally, even Lee Harvey Oswald would not be notable. WWGB (talk) 11:03, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree that there has been a great deal of sensational reporting and that it is inappropriate for Wikipedia to pre-empt the outcome of the trial. However, whatever the outcome I think that this is a case that will be well remembered in the history of criminal law in Australia. Brens (talk) 14:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Lane's water polo career is marginal. Concerning the alleged murder of her daughter, however, WP:BLP1E states that "If the event is significant and the individual's role within it is substantial, a separate biography may be appropriate. ... The significance of an event or individual should be indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." Now "Keli Lane" Ghits number close to 200,000 [4] and interest in the case goes back almost six years [5], as demonstrated by User:Whpq. This is a keeper. WWGB (talk) 01:20, 29 August 2010 (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.