Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katelyn Faber (2nd nomination)

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 and redirect. Nothing merged, so no need to keep the history; on the contrary, I can think of a number of reasons not to keep it. Daniel 02:25, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Katelyn Faber

Much like the Crystal Gail Mangum article, [1] this is another WP:COATRACK dressed up as a biography. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, and this article if you can call it that offers very little encyclopedic value and ultimately fails the 100 year test. Suggest deletion on grounds of WP:BLP and human decency. Burntsauce 16:48, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Move material into an article about the incident. This non-public person is not notable for anything outside the incident so we do not need an article on the subject. This is covered by our BLP and deletion policies, and our notability/biography guidelines. FloNight 16:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
• KEEP she is newsworthy on her own accord and her life goals afterwards the alleged incident, for example as Tawana Brawley. Bnguyen 17:13, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete She was a non-notable 18 year old when the alleged rape by Kobe Bryant occurred. Other than that criminal case and a related civil case, she is not notable. This is adequately covered in Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. Per WP:NOT and WP:BLP the stand-alone bio about her can be deleted, however many independent reliable sources have substantial coverage about her to satisfy WP:N and WP:BIO. Wikipedia is not a newspaper or a supermarket tabloid. Edison 17:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable, should be moved to article about the lawsuits. --Rajah 18:14, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per above, no reason for a separate article from the trial. DreamGuy 20:31, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 00:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• I agree that this is not a biography, but a detailing of rather awful, embarrassing and potential harmful (personally and professionally) personal events; I also agree the mention of the circumstances focusing on the event and not the person is appropriate. I thus suggest that the page be deleted and a redirect created pointing to the trial. --Iamunknown 03:45, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• KEEP Newsworthy person involved in a major story about a major sportsstar. --IvanKnight69 04:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. This is not a biography. Details related to the assault case are already covered in Kobe Bryant sexual assault case making this largely unnecessary and repetitive. RFerreira 05:34, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• KEEP She was a big part of the news and wikipedia is not made to just list celebrities and famous things. It's made to define and explain things in our society that we have encountered. -User:Unknown 23:08, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete however notable the issue may be, the individual is not -Doc^g 08:46, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete The individual is absolutely non notable except for one incident, which is largely independent from her personality. The contents of the article, about criminal procedure etc., should be in the relevant article about the assault. David.Monniaux 08:50, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:NOT and my tireless argument on WP:NOTNEWS. Temporarily newsworthy does not equal permanently encylopedic. Zunaid 09:32, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete because of the redundancy, excessive detail, poor balance, poor sourcing and other biographies of living persons-related problems. --Tony Sidaway 13:24, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• Redirect to Kobe Bryant sexual assault case. The current article could be trimmed and adequately cited, but because this subject's notability is solely related to a single, well-defined event which itself has article coverage, a separate article is functionally a content fork. On the other hand, it would not be appropriate to delete the article without leaving a redirect, nor to redact the name from the target article (which itself could also do with substantial improvement). Serpent's Choice 14:21, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. This isn't a biography. Any relevant content that's not already in Kobe Bryant sexual assault case should be moved there. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
• Delete since there is a much better relevant article, though some later developments need to be merged in. The present article is a disaster with repetition and unsourced statements to an extent rare even on WP. How this can have lasted since 04 puzzles me. WP standards have been better than this even at the start. DGG 23:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
• KEEP This page is very helpful to those looking for information on the person, DO NOT DELETE!!!
• Redirect, per above.--Mike18xx 02:19, 18 June 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.