Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Lauterbach

Maria Lauterbach

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 for better or for worse, policy trumps consensus in these situations and it's clear that WP:BIO, specifically WP:BIO1E, has been violated in this case gaillimh^{Conas tá tú?} 13:41, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

CONSENSUS - Pretty clear that Keep is the preferred result

Keep Deletion proposed by Arbeit Sockenpuppe, who gave the reason: "NN bio". This is a user that claims to be an administrator, although nobody knows that for sure. That user added a prod tag, although from the sources and references in the article it is clear that this is not an NN bio. I erased the prod tag, and added the afd tag. I don't want this article to be deleted, but I certainly don't want it to be deleted because of the prod tag without any discussions. Quoth nevermore (talk) 04:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There was no need to create an AfD since the article has a PROD tag on it. But since the AfD has been removed, would it be acceptable to remove the PROD? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 04:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Arbeit Sockenpuppe is the account of User:Y for use when he is at work. James086^{Talk | Email} 07:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - While it has plenty of sources, it seems to be more of a news article than an encyclopedia article. See point 5 of WP:NOT#NEWS and the second paragraph of WP:N#TEMP. If this turns into a large controversy it should be kept however. James086^{Talk | Email} 07:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nothing to make an encyclopedia article out of here, at the moment this belongs on Wikinews (if it belongs anywhere). BLACKKITE 08:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable enough. And if Wikipedia is not for news articles, then we should delete articles about all missing people as well. Including Disappearance of Madeleine McCann, Taylor Behl, Natalee Holloway, etc. --Adi Sinaga (talk) 08:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See WP:ALLORNOTHING. Arguing that this is not a notable missing persons topic is certainly possible to do in good faith, particularly given the lack of consensus or guidelines regarding such articles. --Dhartung | Talk 10:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ALLORNOTHING is just an essay. I'm not obliged to follow it. --Adi Sinaga (talk) 06:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep certainly the subject of plenty of 3rd party coverage. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 09:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. I'm not convinced of the long-term importance here, but there has been quite a bit of national attention paid to the story due to the military angle. Regardless of outcome it is likely to end up as a high-profile UCMJ case of some kind. --Dhartung | Talk 10:57, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article should be expanded with information about the suspect(s), the rape, her condition, possible abuse of women in the military, and so on. Amputation (talk) 12:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E and per our inability to write a biography of this person because her life was uninteresting. If he disappearance/potential death are notable events (which they could be), let's delete this and include a mention on the relevant army article, or perhaps on MWWS#Possible_instances_of_MWWS, where she is already listed. This is an encyclopedia, and we report on things of interest to the civilization, not on last week's crime victims. Arbeit Sockenpuppe (talk) 15:42, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Every person on that list has their own article. Angrymansr (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS youngamerican (wtf?) 14:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Then please start afd's on all of them instead of constantly pointing to an essay and telling everyone the crap is out there. We can start by deleting every missing or murdered white female from Wikipedia who was not famous, as well as people like:
Rodney King, he is known for one thing, being beat up by police
Abner Louima, also known for one thing, being sodomized
Monica Lewinsky, we all know her one event
Jena 6, they just jumped a kid. That happens every day in NYC.
Latoyia Figueroa, non-white woman who went missing and later found murdered
Tamika Huston, see above
Jessica Lynch, Lori Piestewa & Shoshana Johnson captured during Iraq invasion

I look forward to participating in the cited articles Afd nominations. Please leave me a message when the Afd's begin so I can get my popcorn ready. By the time we delete all of the so-called crap all we'll be left with is the beloved Pokemon characters. Good luck! Angrymansr (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now, now, no need to get testy. youngamerican (wtf?) 04:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there's no need to get testy, but you only said that to avoid answering his question. How about all those articles he mentioned? --Reklamedame (talk) 10:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. BLP concerns and the fact that this is (supposed to be) an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. Quale (talk) 16:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep With BLP no longer a concern, I don't see the difference between this and anything Adi Sinaga cited. If it's sourceable, it usually ends up being notable as well. We get so wrapped up in policy, that it becomes counter-productive. WP:Ignore all rules Angrymansr (talk) 18:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:MWF. Thatcher 19:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Which you just wrote? Classic! :) Arbeit Sockenpuppe (talk) 19:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A perfect summary. BLACKKITE 19:38, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Notable enough for me.--Joebengo (talk) 19:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are other instances, such as the case of Suzanne Marie Collins which are similar in nature and this one is perhaps even a larger issue since she was pregnant and allegedly murdered by another Marine. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 20:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If you delete this, you might as well delete Laci Peterson and every other murder victim that gains national attention. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.134.119.122 (talk) 00:57, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The national attention she's received makes her notable. Phobophile (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 01:32, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:BIO, unless we ammend that guideline to include every missing/murdered white woman who causes a temporary media sensation in the 24 hour news cycle of the United States. youngamerican (wtf?) 14:58, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Since there will be a (non-military) murder trial in the criminal courts (which itself will be a notable Wikipedia article), there will be a need for this article to be kept. Thanks!--Inetpup (talk) 18:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep oodles of third party coverage, agree with Inetpup on the fact of the court case and the large amount of national attention Doc Strange (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Classic WP:BLP1E. If this unfortunate death shows some signs of longterm notability then create Maria Lauterbach murder. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 00:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Plus, it also falls into line of the Category:Murdered pregnant women. Murder being the number one reason for deaths of Pregnant women in the U.S. 1,800 are killed every year. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hourick (talk • contribs) 01:04, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean that they all get articles, or just the pretty white ones? youngamerican (wtf?) 19:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep If articles like Natalie Holloway, Dru Sjodin and Jimmy Hoffa exist so should this. --Nicholas Weiner (talk) 21:05, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the first two, I would point to WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS and, for Hoffa, he clearly meets WP:BIO for his work as a union boss. However tragic this might be, Lauterbach is just a person known for going missing and having the case sensationalized by the media. youngamerican (wtf?) 19:44, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So the Dru article is crap, even though the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Registry is in her name? Please explain that one. Angrymansr (talk) 19:02, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I figured that someone would say something about Holloway before Sjodin. Anyway, this discussion should really stick to the facts about this and only this article, but I'll still respond... I see nothing regarding her inclusion worthiness except for being a well-publicized murder victim who happened to be the case du jour when Congress finally got around to passing a popular election year law. In her case, a redirect to the article on the law would be the best bet. But, yea, until a law is passed in honor of Lauterbach, Sjodin still has more notoriety than Lauterbach. youngamerican (wtf?) 04:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Dru should definitely be two sentences in the article about the registry and a redirect thereto. I would vote for that. Arbeit Sockenpuppe (talk) 16:02, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's impossible at this moment to make a pronouncement regarding the long-term notability of this incident, but right now, it's evident that there has been nontrivial coverage in multiple reliable sources. We need to be on guard in editing the article, to eliminate BLP issues, however. --SSBohio 23:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Plenty of coverage from reliable sources shows she is notable, at least for the time being. This can always be brought back to AfD later, but right now I don't see any question about notability. Terraxos (talk) 01:22, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would note, however, that Death of Maria Lauterbach (or something similar) would probably be a better title. Terraxos (talk) 01:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep; she's the center of a national news story and brewing military scandal that's getting daily and ongoing attention by nationwide media outlets. -- Sethant (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It seems now that the killer is one of the Marines. This has big repercussions about how women are treated in the US military, and whether cases of rape have been covered up in the past. As the story goes on, this article might be moved to another more appropriate title, but not deleted. --Reklamedame (talk) 10:21, 17 January 2008 (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.