Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rachel Entwistle

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 of the debate was no consensus. Mailer Diablo 09:08, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rachel Entwistle, Lillian Entwistle[edit]

Both were tagged for speedy deletion by User:Rmhermen as nn-bio but talk page claims this is story is being covered by news agencies. Bringing it to AfD instead. My personal feeling is that murder victims are not necessarily notable. howch e ng {chat} 19:39, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, tragic... but not notable. This has garned local media attention in the Boston area but has not been nationally reported in the U.S. Unless someone can demonstrate that this has been widely reported in the U.K. I lean towards deletion--Isotope23 19:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This story has been covered unrelentingly on CNN, FOX, MSNBC, etc. Saying that it has not been nationally reported in the US is grossly inaccurate. Monicasdude 20:00, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think "unrelentingly" is a case of hyperbole. I've seen a passing story about it on CNN. I've seen nothing on MSNBC. I don't watch FOXNews because it's not really news. I don't spend 24 hours a day watching the news, but this is not something that has been reported on the level of Natalee Holloway. Again, I hope they catch the bastard that did this, but it's just not any more notable than the dozens of murders that happen every week in my home town.--Isotope23 20:55, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was working at home (sick) yesterday with TV news in the background, and it was covered by CNN Headline every 30 minutes. I switched to MSNBC later in the day, and they ran virtually identical, relatively lengthy segments three times in three hours. I wish the comment was hyperbole, but it got about 100 times as Bush's much-needed program to increase the costs of college education in the US. Monicasdude 21:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, just what we need. Bush increasing the cost of education... :)--Isotope23 21:59, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yes, tragic, but not more notable than the plethora of other crimes. Avi 20:09, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As above, not every murder is notable. Rmhermen 20:21, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is actually quite the major story. --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 21:05, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per Isotope 23s request for evidence this case has been widely reported in the UK.

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16] [17] [18] [19]

Jcuk 21:14, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because unlike the Shipman case or Hindley case, no one will remember these people this time next year. The case has already dropped from the radar screen. Pilatus 21:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the case will re-emerge undoubtedly when a suspect is arrested and tried. If we've forgotten it a year from now, then nominate again. Carlossuarez46 22:26, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As Pilatus says, is this going to be an iconic crime in a year's time, or even a few months' time? No. Non-notable. If it becomes iconic later, it can always be recreated. Tearlach 02:07, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- perhaps not the most notable story, but notable at least in New England and the UK, not to mention a very weird case with some interesting twists and turns in the investigation. Haikupoet 03:44, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Pilatus and Tearlach. Ral315 (talk) 18:34, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, tragic but not encyclopaedic. Wikinews is three doors down. Stifle 18:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - its on the BBC News front page right now given that charges have been levelled, and I've been hearing about it on UK radio, and I suspect that if I were to watch the news, it would get on there too. Notable. --New Progressive 17:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There has just been a 2 minute item on BBC national radio news. Bhoeble 18:18, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Tragic but not notable. Djegan 19:01, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- An international news story that got major play on MSNBC's Nancy Grace show isn't notable? --badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEME?) 20:16, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Where does it say that I voted for the deletion (or said was not notable) of "an international news story"? The question here is two people, not the international news, redirect to Neil Entwistle would be adiquate for both. Djegan 23:05, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - One of the wonderful things about wikinews is that it can cover these types of cases - which are undoubtly prominant at the moment; this prominance is not in question. But wikipedia is an encyclopedia and until the full facts are known and come out (as which they will undoubtly) I think it is best, as has often has being on wikipedia, not to write articles based purely on headlines and halfacts. Djegan 23:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Both articles must stay. The suspect is very important, but the victims are the most important part of the whole thing. The articles give a little bit more info about the victims, I think. Fanficgurl 3:41, 10 February 2006 (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.