Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jurijus Kadamovas and Iouri Mikhel
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 keep, at least for now. As Kubigula mentioned, things can always be reexamined in the future if need be. Seraphimblade Talk to me 07:44, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Jurijus Kadamovas and Iouri Mikhel
Despite having sources for this article, editors involved are not sure that the material is notable enough to warrant an article in WP, so we are asking the community at large to comment. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Comment After seeing the article created (initial version), I was concerned that it may have some WP:BLP issues, but since there did seem to be Google search results, I was not comfortable simply tagging it for CSD. After reflection, I brought the issue to Jossi's attention, expressed my concerns, and between the two of us, we cleaned up the BLP issues and sourced it with references. (Initially it had none, just two external links.) Jossi created two redirects from the individuals, and while the article is now properly sourced, and neutral, I think the issue of if this should be included is still a valid one, as raised by another editor. WP:NOT#NEWS would suggest that in the long term, historical context, this entry may not prove notable enough. Ariel♥Gold 01:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Delete I'm the other editor Jossi and ArielGold mention. This appears to fall under WP:NOT#NEWS. "The fact that someone or something has been in the news for a brief period of time does not automatically justify an encyclopedia article." It's the nature of news agencies to report crimes, extensively, and for an encyclopedia to report "long-term historical notability of persons and events." Although this may be a rare federal death penalty case, that's only mentioned in passing in one source. This article doesn't seem to have any real notability, yet, and if it ever does it can be recreated then. Pairadox 01:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, IMHO the criminals are notable enough to be included Alex Bakharev 00:35, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Can you provide evidence to support your opinion? Pairadox 00:51, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 00:19, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Well the murderers are subjects of many nontrivial publications from the leading news outlets as seen from the list of references. The rest is just a judgement, but I would think that serial murdering, large amount of ransom involved, the mafia-ties, ethnical obertones etc. make the murders and the murderers quite notable and the info useful even after some time. I could imagine the info might be of some use for other articles (e.g. related to Russian mafia or extortion) Alex Bakharev 01:22, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
-
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Wknight94 (talk) 11:22, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 06:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
- Keep. There appears to be significant nationwide coverage of these two criminals. This may well fall under WP:NOT], but the widespread coverage and some of the unusual circumstances suggests to me that we err on the side of inclusion, at least for now. If interest fades and there is no further coverage in the future, thus demonstrating a lack of long term historical interest, we can always revisit this issue.--Kubigula (talk) 04:31, 23 September 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.
