Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Kreager

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 delete as a short-term news story. Articles are not created here with the expectation that they may "become" more notable. Tijuana Brass (talk) 07:22, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sarah Kreager

Sarah Kreager (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Wikipedia is not a news site, and this article is lacking sourced content to verify that the subject is of lasting significance beyond her current appearance in the news. An article can be recreated if and when the subject can be established as historically notable. Suggest deletion per WP:NOT#NEWS. --Muchness (talk) 05:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep. This article and many others should be made as accessible as any other news worthy of being kept on the minds of American people.
  • Delete - I agree with the nom on this one; the incident occurred very recently and is subject to WP:NOT#NEWS. I'd suggest transwiki'ing to WikiNews (But they'll probably already have an article there) and deleting the article until and if the incident becomes more of a historical, noteworthy incident, in which case it'd almost certainly be an article on the incident not the people involved. Spawn Man Review Me! 05:24, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep Covered in many news articles. Nationally famous story. A female Rodney King/white Rosa Parks Justforasecond (talk) 05:32, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOT#NEWS. --DAJF (talk) 05:43, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, no indication of wider significance, although I suspect the Vanguard News Network feels it's epochal. --Dhartung | Talk 07:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, At this point just a passing news story, if it becomes more widely reported and lasting signigicance, then a recreated article might be appropriate. Jons63 (talk) 13:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and review again later as per Justforasecond and because if the story grows, the initial event would be something people look for in an encyclopedia. --Arcanios (talk) 13:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and review again later - Agree with Arcanios, keep and review later - story is growing. Phreakster 1998 (talk) 17:13, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Changed to Delete - this is local juvenile crime. Phreakster 1998 (talk) 18:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - this is an event of national significance. I live in San Francisco and was on every tv yesterday, very unfortunate incident, hate crime reminiscent of Rodney King. User:olympic97 (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2007 — Olympic97 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Delete local news story which until there's more of a general dialouge among the nation about it, is not that notable currently. Nate · (chatter) 21:06, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - There are more than Google 4700 hits on this incident and it's moved beyond news articles and into blogs, etc. This is not a story that is going to die. I think the article would be about her, not the incident since a "baltimore bus beating" article wouldn't narrow the topic much. :) Mdlawmba (talk) 07:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

ETA: Looking at articles on other high-profile, similar crimes, it is hardly uncommon for the victim to be the article rather than the incident. In fact, I couldn't find many "incident" articles, even the Manson murders doesn't have one. I don't think the electrons will be too inconvenienced if we keep both articles until know how the story becomes known, i.e. the "rodney king incident" or the "I-10 beating". Mdlawmba (talk) 07:03, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete (redirect to article about incident) - If the story grows then an article on the incident (which I'm sure already exists) is appropriate. However, an independent biographical article on the victim is not warranted. Being the victim of a crime does not, in itself, establish notability for an individual. Editors should please take care to distinguish between the notability of an incident and the notability of individual people involved in the incident. (--Lquilter (talk) 21:08, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete This is the sort of article BLP was intended for. Unless there is continuing coverage, it should be deleted. if there is, it should not be under her name. DGG (talk) 02:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • redirect by article about the incident--there already is one at Baltimore bus beating], which I deprodded, pending this discussion. The prominence of the name of a victim is a violation of the spirit of BLP. DGG (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and review again later this is in important story and it isn't over yet, more information will emerge with the trial, lets asses it again after that - Schrandit (talk) 03:47, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - This incident has already moved way beyond the scope of just an entry from the "police blotter" of a big-city newspaper, or even "local news", for that matter. Kepiblanc (talk) 11:05, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. At the moment, this is a one-off news story. There is no extensive coverage, and probably will not be. Natalie (talk) 20:15, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. At the very least it should be kept until we see if the incident remains, or just kinda gets thrown the way of being forgotten. Not to mention, other people who are associated with an incident typically have an article page for themselves. Timmie.merc (talk) 07:12, 16 December 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.