Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cesar Ivan Aguilar-Cano
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 23:43, 5 February 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.
Revision as of 23:43, 5 February 2023 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. Sr13 06:12, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Cesar Ivan Aguilar-Cano (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
WP:NOT memorial. Hundreds of kids each year go missing and are murdered. That does not establish notability. Coverage is mostly local coverage. Prod contested by creator of article who believes that being an admin confers greater respect than regular users. hbdragon88 02:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:NOT memorial says "Wikipedia is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be notable besides being fondly remembered". Are you saying myself, whoever created this article, and the many newspaper writers who wrote the many articles about his death all his relatives or friends? That's nonsense. --Purple hills 23:14, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I think you're interpreting the text too literally. The "friends and relatives" is mostly aimed towards people to probably would write about their deceased close ones. Empahsis should be laid on the second line, "notable besides being fondly remembered," which at current this person currently doesn't meet. hbdragon88 04:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This is indeed a horrible, sad crime - but that doesn't confer notability, in the context of Wikipedia. See also WP:NOTE. If later events render the incident notable (as, for example, with Megan's Law and its Namesake, Megan Kanka), then this would become background in the context of a broader, notable issue. ZZ 03:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Can you point to the guideline which says 'mostly local' coverage does not establish notability? There are many murdered and kidnapped children who are notable because of the media coverage of the crime, and this sad murder does have a lot of media coverage. Deletion is probably premature as the murder is two weeks old and any number of factors, such as the mother's request for a special immigration visa to return to the U.S. after burying her son in their native Guatemala, the fact that the main suspect was a registered sex offender, and the fact that a public defender has been appointed even though the suspect has not been officially charged with anything, could make this event become national news. Scarykitty 03:28, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:NOT#NEWS, if it suddenly carches like wildfire then an article would be warranted, but not now. hbdragon88 03:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, nothing demonstrating greater notability for this murder victim than any of the other hundreds of US murder victims daily. --Dhartung | Talk 03:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, if we had an article for every sad child murder that got media coverage, we would turn into wikicrimelog... Sometimes, its hard to wikilawyer, but rules be rules. :(--Cerejota 09:30, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete No assertion of notability. the_undertow talk 09:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:NOT#NEWS - No "long-term historical notability of persons and events" established Corpx 18:00, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Better yet, speedy delete as there is not a single reliable source in the article to speak of. Burntsauce 18:15, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:NOT#NEWS. The death of a four year old is a tragedy, but each one does not automatically become notable enough for an encyclopedia article. No evidence was presented in the article that the disappearance and death was a major news story like the similar case of Disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Wikipedia is not a newspaper, it is not a crime blog, and it is not a site for memorials to dead people who were not notable before their death. Edison 20:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Am I allowed to vote here? This was probably the most reported murder in the Louisville area in years. It has been on the front page of the papers multiple times and leads off every local news broadcast most nights for weeks. Why does it have to be CNN-level news to have a Wikipedia article? They are very arbitrary in what they choose to report. His disapearance, death and the investigation are important on a local scale. I think people who don't live here are jumping to the wrong conclusion that this is just another crime log. --Purple hills 21:25, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- It doesnt have to be CNN-level news. I just dont think there is any "long-term historical notability" for this person Corpx 21:29, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I beg to differ. The time he has been in the news is almost unprecidented, for this area you have to go back to see Mel Ignatow or Shanda Sharer, 20 and 15 years ago, to see murders/murder victims of this importance. We have no articles on any of the hundreds of people murdered in the Louisville area between 1992 (Sharer) and now, as far as I know. It is because of this that I think he is of long-term note. I do not see the need to delete this article. Surely 1 such article per 15 years is allowable? --Purple hills 21:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I Have improved the article to show media coverage from the AP and non-Louisville media. Can someone who knows these things tell me what I need to do now? I can add more but I don't want to waste work if the article will just be deleted. --Purple hills 22:10, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete (for now) - I'm from Louisville. It's possible that the crime itself will become notable based on its emerging details, but I don't see how this child will ever become notable as a subject for an encyclopedia (Wikipedia is not a memorial). If the story of the murder itself accumulates enough notability, the murder and surrounding events may become worthy of an article (see Trinity murders or Standard Gravure shooting). I do think we need to see more than just local coverage for this to become notable in an encyclopedic sense; otherwise, it's a murder that can be considered comparable to many other similar murders that occur in an ongoing sense in the United States. Stevie is the man! Talk • Work 22:40, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Mostly a memorial article.--JForget 22:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Newsworthyness does not equate to long-term notability, per WP:NOT#NEWS (policy) and WP:NOTNEWS (not policy, but the opinion of numerous editors, including this one). I'd suggest that for the moment the authors write a piece for Wikinews instead; if in the future the case proves to have long-term impact the Wikipedia article can always be resurrected. Iain99 23:19, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete The boy is notable for only one event, for that, he should be redirected to the article that talks about his murder, if any exists.--Kylohk 12:02, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.