Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Boitumelo McCallum

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. The "deletes" mostly have policy on their side; the "keeps" do not; the "move/rewrite" is a good idea but difficult to achieve with this article as it stands. However, if the original author or anyone else thinks they can achieve it, please ask for the history to go into your userspace and I'll oblige. With all due respect to Mr McCallum and for the avoidance of doubt, your input is welcome and was considered but it was not part of my thinking when determining consensus here. ➔ REDVEЯS was here 11:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boitumelo McCallum

Boitumelo McCallum (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This one's not going to make me popular, I know... Per WP:NOT#MEMORIAL I don't think this should be here. She appears to be famous solely as the victim of a crime, and as per policy in that case the article should be about the case & not the victim; however, tragic as it is, the case doesn't appear to be unusual/significant enough to warrant its own article. However, I'm not in New York, and the number of press citations makes me think that maybe this case was more significant in the US than it appears to be. — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:01, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

• Move to Murder of Boitumelo McCallum, with a substantial rewrite. Currently has a big problem with the tone of the article right now... "The Jealous Boyfriend"? That's PoV for starters, surely, unless sourced. Infact, a lot of cleanup is needed, of various sorts. But I do think the case is notable; and, as is the case with articles such as Disappearance of Madeleine McCann and ... another story from this year (what it is exactly has completely passed my mind for right now), an article on the case with a section on the bio of the victim seems like the best option (especially considering, as you point out, the sheer number of sources available). AllynJ (talk | contribs) 21:10, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Wait, has the boyfriend been convicted? If not, then he's an accused murderer, not murderer, surely? Loooots of tone/pov issues here... AllynJ (talk | contribs) 21:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. An importent and well-known case. And my advice, if you have symphaty for an article, dont nominate it. If it's really that bad someone else will. Dont forget then an article is something someone worked hard on. When he sees a messege like you wrotte he's like: "I worked on it, wrote, found references and he's not shure but nominates it??" So for the future, nothing will happen to you if you don't nominate, esspecially if you're not shure. M.V.E.i. 21:12, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment What on earth are you talking about? Nowhere do I say I have sympathy for this article, I say I think it's apparently a clear violation of WP:NOT and am bringing it here for a second opinion just in case it's more notable than it appears. — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:36, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Move and Edit - I have to agree with AllynJ. This article is noteworthy, it hit both New York Times and USAToday, but the POV is a major problem. Icestorm815 21:16, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It requires to much of a rewrite, instead of moving it just start over from scratch at Murder of Boitumelo McCallum. ILovePlankton^(L—n) 22:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia does not do memorial pages, and that's what this is. Being in the news does not make you notable. This is a sad story, not a notable one, unless you an show this is a historical event. MarkBul 22:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:ITSSOURCED pretty well, to be true, and there was a lot of news coverage, but apart from her parents this is not an unusual or important crime. Women are murdered by their boyfriends every day, and the only thing that sets this one apart is the academic setting.--Dhartung | Talk 02:21, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Nothing distinguishes this from the thousands of other murders reported in the newspapers. Clarityfiend 07:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete reads like a memoriam. Sad, but NN. Also appears to be local/state-interest only. All refs are New York. Irrelevant to the rest of the English-speaking wikipedia populace. --Sc straker 22:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. I put a lot of work (one month's worth) into this page with cite references and almost everything else. Considering that at least one of her parent's had dealings with Nelson Mandela, dealt with the U.N. and other factors, this should be enough to keep it. "Too much of a rewrite?" Why? It's as POV as I can make it. The girl appears to have been on her way to be famous. Kindly recheck the story and maybe do a few Google searches on her.--MurderWatcher1 18:59, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Regretfully, WP:EFFORT is not a valid reason to keep an article. shoy 13:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete having a parent having "dealings" with a notable somebody doesn't make you (or even the parent) notable. Notability is neither associative nor inherited. Carlossuarez46 22:09, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletions.
• Weak Keep since a lot of the POV is now (hopefully) removed and sources such as CNN, MSNBC, USA Today have been added. Weak argument but I've seen worse. I also lean towards moving the article per AllynJ if nothing else. --ImmortalGoddezz 07:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep: I notice that the argument is that this is "not notable". The basic notability criteria for biographical articles says that the criteria are the article has a statement or evidence of why the person is notable, and "the person must have been the subject of published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." Nowhere does it say the person must be somebody particularly important, just that they must be the subject of a lot of reliable published works (e.g. articles), and the article should explain why, and it passes on both counts. One might venture that there must be some reason for all the coverate. On the other hand I do agree that people are murdered every day. Her death is hardly unique, but Wikipedia is not paper so if somebody wants to work on it (which people have been) then I say why not keep it? --TexasDex 00:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maintenence tags

As the father of Boitumelo McCallum when I read this article most of it is made up from newspaper articles at the time of my daughters death. The newspapers attempted to create scenarios of what had taken place before and on her death. These scenarios are very inaccurate and do little justice to Tumi's life. They are also very one dimensional. While considerable research may have been done to put up the page, this does not justify the reason for it remaining if it is inaccurate. It lacks substantive research and relies only on the media. At no time have the media actually interviewed me about many of these events. Much of the article is inaccurate and to edit it would mean to completely rewrite the piece. I strongly urge that this article be completely deleted, and a more appropriate page replace it that is more wholisitc and balnced in its perspective. The New York Times articles have been more accurate but even they have inaccuracies.(Rob McCallum 6.59 6 October, 2007) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Robmac367 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Robmac367: I had created the page to honor your daughter. When I had posted the page onto Wikipedia, I had informed your wife of the page's creation via telephone. It was my sole purpose to bring honor to your daughter and let the world know of her plight and to somehow ease your family's pain. I'm sorry if, in any way, you were offended by my work. If you will check the other pages that I have created on murdered women re: Jennifer Moore, Ramona Moore and Chanel Petro-Nixon, then you will see that this was my sole intention also with these other young women. We have had too many senseless deaths in New York City in the past year and one-half, and this was my way of fighting this evil - by creating references for these young women. I have had no other way to research your daughter and her story other than searches on the Internet and her MySpace.com webpage, and barely a few other websites. It is hard to describe any individual and put the totality of that person's life into any written kind of perspective. I am saddened by the page's deletion and I had hoped that others would contribute to the page. I won't attempt any further work on Boitumelo unless you request it. Again, my apologies if there was any offense. All I can do now is pray for your family.--MurderWatcher1 16:13, 8 October 2007 (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.