Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scarlett Keeling case

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. seresin | wasn't he just...? 20:25, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Scarlett Keeling case[edit]

Should be speedy deleted. Non-notable news case, Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and egregious violation of WP:BLP. My speedy tag was removed. Corvus cornix_talk 23:22, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) delete I removed the speedy because it doesn't meet the speedy criteria. (It is not a BPL concern because keeling is dead, it is about the case - not the person and it is sourced that D'Souza is accused of rape.) Nevertheless it should be deleted. While there is some coverage, as there sometimes is for murders - especially rape-murder involving minors - this has no significant lasting and historical interest and impact. This belong on wikinews, not here. Jon513 (talk) 23:27, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Another 5 sentence article about some murder. Tragic for the victim and her family, but not encyclopedic. WikiNews, indeed. Rien Post (talk) 23:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - its newsworthy but at the moment there's no evidence of any lasting significance. And there's no reason why someone who has been arrested, but not charged should have their name in an encyclopedia.--Doc^g 23:35, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Newsworthy, but this isn't a news source. TJRC (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This has recieved a lot of news coverage here in England, but until evidence is shown that the case has lasting significance (documentaries, books etc) this should be removed, as Wikipedia is not a news source. J Milburn (talk) 23:51, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. Potential to become 'encyclopaedic' over the next few weeks/months as this story unfolds, but is not article-worthy at present - can easily be written IF and WHEN it is more than a headline. Booglamay (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete BLP1E, etc., not nearly ready for an article. Lawrence § t/e 03:24, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep? Seems to me there is plenty to say on this (highly odd) case, enough to warrant an article. It just needs expanding. U-Mos (talk) 16:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a developing story and although looks small as compared to other bigger problems the world faces, is still a major issue in India. Goa has become a hotspot of crime and drugs, in recent years, this is what this case preciely points to and not just rape and murder, so I suggest we should keep it and see what the outcomes are.This article just needs expanding. sandy_amity ( talk) —Preceding comment was added at 04:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki to WikiNews. 202.54.176.51 (talk) 04:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
wikilawyering That is a little bit difficult, the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 License (wikinew's license) is incompatible with the GNU Free Documentation License. To move it would require the permission of everyone who added to the article. (As a contributer I give my permission for a tranwikification, Your vote to transwiki gives implicit consent for your additions, the only one left is User:Pauly04 who started the article -I'll go ask him.). Jon513 (talk) 14:20, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Pauly has given his permission (here). I recommend an immediate transwiki. Jon513 (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Endorse transwiki as all parties agree to the re-licensing and this is best suited for Wikinews as explained above. Coccyx Bloccyx (talk) 19:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep anmd am baffled as to why anyone would say different. We have multiple reliable sources for a case which becomes bigger by the day. If we cover all English girls tragically murdered in England, which we do, then why not this case, unless people think it being in India makes it unnotable. While I dont object to wikinews covwering thios case we should either be consistent and delete Disappearance of Shannon Matthews et al. The real problem with this afd is that it is was immature as the case keeps rolling and getting bigger and bigger. Why no mention of her mother and the accusations of neglect? Why not make a better article? Thanks, SqueakBox 15:38, 15 March 2008 (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.