Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Martin Crawford

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 keep. howcheng {chat} 19:18, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] John Martin Crawford

Arrggggh!!! first it was executed murderers, then victims, now its murderers who weren't executed. A ruling from above on this subject is due, I think. Incidentally, the author has submitted at least 2 more entries on the same subject in the last 24 hours MNewnham 15:52, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep, see also: Category:Canadian serial killers, same user seems to be adding many articles on the subject. - FrancisTyers 15:59, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per above. -- JJay 16:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
• comment -- I'd still like to see some kind of clarification and guidelines, though, of notability through crime, or we could end up at Category:Minor Shoplifters of Ulan Bator MNewnham 17:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
  • If you manage to lift a shop you're notable. Do you have any idea how heavy those things are? ;) Aecis ^praatpaal 00:16, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as we have Peter Sutcliffe, Myra Hindley and Ian Brady, all murderers who were not executed, why not? Jcuk 22:28, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment. Sutcliffe, Hindley and Brady are especially well known criminals who still (many years after their deads) evoke a strong reaction in the minds of the British public. Can this guy claim any noteability based on amount of newspaper coverage, for example? Sutcliffe, Hindley and Brady have miles of newsprint dedicated to them. JanesDaddy 23:42, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. I would really like to see the following approach to all borderline notable subjects like murderers, webcomic characters, races from the extended Star Wars universe, etc. Make the main "List of <whatever>" article; list all subjects with a very brief summary; and redirect all potential candidates to the main article. It's as much as they deserve. Flyboy Will 00:35, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, Crawford is notable because he was a horriffic serial killer who was, at the time, mostly ignored. He's lately become the subject of a book and television documentary on the CBC. Needless to say, Canadian serial killers would get less attention in America, but that doesn't make somebody an unknown ... and you're only going to find killers being executed in the dark ages, in America, and in third world countries, so I can't see how that is the standard for worthiness as an entry. Or would you suggest that somebody like Paul Bernardo should lose his entry too? Doooook 01:11, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. After looking up the info on Google, it seems he is somewhat noteable, ironically for his relative obscurity, given the scale and nature of his crimes. The book Just Another Indian goes into the dichotomy of his fame/obscurity. It does need a lot of tidying though. JanesDaddy 17:11, 27 December 2005 (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.