Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naomi Almeida

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). We have 10 votes to delete (Quale voted twice, accidentally I'm sure), 5 to keep. That's borderline. What swings this over to the "no consensus" result is the fact that the last delete vote was given without any reason. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:31, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Naomi Almeida

A very sad story, but that does not make it notable nor worth keeping. Groeck 23:00, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

  • Comment: The contributor might want to look at some alternatives to wikipedia if they want this information to be preserved. Kappa 23:04, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete Under either C.7 or because the original text includes "Edit or delete at your discretion." While I understand the desire not to let someone fade away into memory, WP is not the place for memorials. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:09, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, the article establishes notability: "she was in all Canadian news sites at the time of her murder". Kappa 23:28, 29 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep does not meet deletion criteria. Trollderella 00:02, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, no more notable than any other solved child murder. "In all Canadian news sites" doesn't hold much value when the author then says "...but I could only find one." — Lomn | Talk / RfC 00:13:23, 2005-08-30 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. An internet search eventually leads to articles from the Toronto Star (see [1]) and National Post (see [2]), though I can't access them. There is also a soccer field named in her honour in London, Ontario. Mindmatrix 01:18, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Delete. After some contemplation, I've decided to switch my vote. Mindmatrix 20:28, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, nn. Trollderella's ideosyncratic keep criteria are not those of Wikipedia. Zoe 08:01, August 30, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Notability not established by article. Gamaliel 08:56, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. How does Wikipedia is NOT a memorial not count as deletion criteria, Trollderella? Proto t c 11:44, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, with regrets. It's a sad reflection on modern society that this has become a common enough occurence not to be notable.--Scimitar parley 16:54, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable. Gateman1997 17:00, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and expand the references section of this article. Hall Monitor 22:50, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Edit, there is a page at cbc.ca that may be a good link for this story, but it is presently unaccessible due to the cbc strike
  • Delete. Most horrific crimes are not notable in themselves, and do not confer encyclopedic notability on their unfortunate victims. Quale 16:28, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • keep please because kappa is right and wikipedia is not paper either Yuckfoo 17:23, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • As far as I'm concerned, a person who's only notable as a crime victim should have an article only if they have significant name recognition on their own. That is, if a meaningful number of people could hear their name, without any explanation or context given, and know that a crime victim is being discussed. Kristen French, Leslie Mahaffy and Cecilia Zhang have this type of name recognition, but Naomi Almeida has virtually no name recognition outside the immediate London, Ontario area. The likelihood of somebody typing "Naomi Almeida" in the search box is vanishingly low, since virtually nobody is ever going to hear the name outside of a context that already explains who she is. So, to me, that's a delete, sad though the story may be. Bearcat 19:38, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not a memorial. Quale 19:31, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 19:29, 5 September 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.