106:
crimes but they don't have a wikipage and L.A. is the second largest media market in the US next to New York). If you look at the edit history of this article, it was written as a memorial page to her. What is even more telling that this is a memorial page is that no article of the suspected murderer, David Barton
Sullivan exists. It is, I believe, the sole "victim only" article on here. Other articles of victims such as
577:
517:- now that this seems to have been cleaned up, I think it's important. I'm from New Zealand (note: nowhere near Washington) and I heard about her death, which is both unusual and notable for what would usually be an everyday American murder. There is a lot of talk about her on teenage websites, and IMO it's useful to have a reference to who she is. -
507:
the article I had been searching hours for. In the end, I never found the information I needed because someone considered the page a memorial (and it was an old deletion from over a year before I found it). Lots of pages that people would consider a memorial do have value to some people. Plus, what will it hurt to have one more article on wikipedia?
506:
I find that this had some significance because her death did get a lot of attention. It was not what I would consider a memorial. Like I said in my vote above, I was searching for information on google a while ago, and I could not find the information. I found one site that was about the DELETION of
441:
is a broad topic. If you mean 'not a memorial', then by reading the latest version of the article you will see it is not that. The issue essentially being voted on here is whether the fact that this murder was the first (apparently) relatively obscure death to be spread by MySpace/Internet and cause
175:
Her death has made an impact on the world. Right now, she may not seem like she deserves a page, but later down the road someone may need or want this information. I have seen articles that I needed that were deleted because at that point in time those people did not see them relevant. If we delete
105:
I also think it is extremely sad but I also agree that there shouldn't be a page devoted to her. Her death did get a lot of attention in the
Washington area, but there are a lot of high profile murders that happen elswhere. (In the Los Angeles area alone a lot of media attention is given to many
314:
I agree that as it is written now it sounds like a memorial. The only way it can stay is if it's fixed up to highlight why this murder is different than most and why the case will be memorable far into the future (not just for family and friends), and do it all by pointing to neutral verifiable
149:
people, I quote: "Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events". I think she would pass the live test per the article from UK plus the charity event at McDo. Given this is a deceased person, the only proposed policy I see there is (I paraphrase) "A widely
150:
recognized impact on history" which is fairly vague and maybe too strict. I think one could make a case that there could be an impact on issues of fastfood workplace security given the publicity. The cleanup IMO should focus more on the workplace murder to justify the notability
383:
a verifiable and reputable source has described this as "on a global scale". Likewise, where is there any evidence to assert that this only received coverage because it was a "slow news day"? A tribute video with a million hits is sufficient on its own to justify the article.
239:
Memorial would be if you focus on the person's life. News would be if it's a run-of-the-mill event. In this case, if the article can be focused on the workplace murder, and subsequent events, given that there was world wide publicity, I think it would be construed as notable.
300:, Knowledge (XXG) cannot be a memorial. This page reads like it was written by one of Anna's friends as a way to memorialize what may have very well been a wonderful girl. Again, I am not anti-rememberance, but Knowledge (XXG) is not the place for this.
253:
a run-of-the-mill event. Had it not been a slow news day, this would not have recieved any significant publicity. Any general discussion of the concept of "workplace murder" should be made on a specific page at that title - not in a biography.
198:, but requires a firm grip to ensure her notability is illustrated in NPOV terms. I find it terribly sad that this girl's murder is notable only for expanding Myspace's tawdry ubiquity into the sphere of mourning, rather than for her tragic death
162:
The
Guardian is a reputable source that verifies that Anna Svidersky's death has gained "worldwide attention". It does not now read at all like a memorial, but as an informative article. My condolences to Anna's family and friends.
551:
although WP:NOT a memorial, the article is not a simple "a lived and a died and will be missed" she became a newsworthy topic carried by major media due to the circumstances of her death... if we delete this then we need to nuke
369:
No change of opinion here, either. I stand by the NfD, lest we make pages for everyone who no longer lives, but whose MySpace page continues to attract attention. Miss Anna
Svidersky is not the first, and is not the last.
333:
newspaper, which is one of the four "serious" national UK papers (for those not familiar with it) and which I have used as a main verifiable source. Comments above are based on the previous version of this article.
48:. As a note, I think it quite possible that this decision will get reversed within a year. However, Svidersky is but one example of a noted media phenomenon, which itself has attracted considerable attention.
176:
Anna, we might as well delete anyone else who has been murdered. There are many articles in here about people who just died. Though, perhaps you should mention how her death has affected the world.
329:
I have rewritten this article throughout from an encyclopedic viewpoint. It is a mistake to see it as a "memorial" or "tribute" page. The wider significance of this tragedy was clearly asserted by
94:
As sad as Anna
Svidersky's death is (and it is), I don't feel that Knowledge (XXG) should devote a page to her. In the spirit of being diplomatic, I would like this matter discussed.
110:
at least mention in detail, about the suspects. Knowledge (XXG) is not a memorial and this article is being treated as one which is evident by the constant POV assertions. --
442:
the 'mourning after' grief syndrome for many thousands of strangers worldwide, as attested to by the
Guardian article, supports sufficient notability to justify inclusion.
355:
I'm sorry but I must disagree. If anything, this version strikes me as even less encyclopedic than the version I reviewed previously. No change of opinion.
401:
the first (though probably not the last) example of extensive MySpace mourning. She wasn't notable in life, and even her death itself wasn't notable. But as
472:
484:
17:
407:
put it: "The grim truth is that this tragedy has mutated into the latest internet buzz". By that criteria, she easily qualifies per
202:. Nevertheless, that is what she will be remembered for outside her local community and that is why she deserves an article.
608:
36:
561:
284:
346:
I think the latest version is much improved. It probably warrants new votes or comments from the 'Delete' voters.
557:
607:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
480:
580:
543:
521:
498:
464:
446:
433:
388:
374:
364:
350:
338:
319:
304:
288:
263:
244:
234:
209:
180:
167:
154:
133:
116:
98:
88:
55:
476:
539:, recentism from sensationalist media. No one will remember it within few months. This is not memorial.
371:
301:
95:
72:
585:
Yes, we probably do need to clean out most of those as well. They are very sad but not encyclopedic.
540:
415:
206:
52:
508:
177:
518:
590:
572:
360:
259:
230:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
380:
249:
Yes, you made that case above. I disagree. It's a sad statement about our society but this
129:
107:
84:
438:
408:
297:
218:
142:
68:
430:
412:
203:
280:
111:
61:
49:
385:
335:
164:
187:
586:
565:
528:
495:
443:
403:
356:
347:
316:
255:
241:
226:
151:
275:, getting murdered does not confer notability. Knowledge (XXG) is not a memorial.
553:
125:
80:
75:. I'm transferring it here as a courtesy. Comments from the MFD page follow.
457:
276:
379:
It is your personal opinion that it is a "run of the mill event". From a
222:
576:
124:
Comments above this line were placed before the debate was transferred.
601:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
469:KEEP, what harm is it possibly doing being there?
611:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
494:please this person should have an article
397:completely miss the point. Anna Svidersky
315:sources. That's a tall order for sure.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
67:Originally incorrectly nominated on
310:user also commented above the line
24:
393:I respectfully propose that Angr
219:Knowledge (XXG) is not a memorial
575:
1:
44:The result of the debate was
511:16:51 EST, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
298:What Knowledge (XXG) is Not
628:
562:Category:Murdered children
558:MarĂa Elena ChĂĄvez Caldera
604:Please do not modify it.
581:01:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
544:20:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
522:08:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
499:19:44, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
465:15:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
447:12:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
434:06:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
389:02:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
375:04:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
365:02:19, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
351:02:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
339:02:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
320:22:45, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
305:22:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
289:19:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
264:19:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
245:16:10, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
235:14:02, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
210:01:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
181:21:36, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
168:01:04, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
155:22:56, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
134:22:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
117:18:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
99:17:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
89:22:17, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
56:04:51, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
475:comment was added by
141:(with a cleanup) per
73:User:Rockneedsasavior
217:. It is tragic but
593:
531:
488:
363:
311:
262:
233:
190:
619:
606:
589:
579:
570:
560:and everyone in
526:
470:
462:
359:
309:
258:
229:
185:
114:
108:Natalee Holloway
34:
627:
626:
622:
621:
620:
618:
617:
616:
615:
609:deletion review
602:
566:
541:Pavel Vozenilek
471:âThe preceding
458:
429:as per WP:NOT--
112:
65:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
625:
623:
614:
613:
597:
596:
595:
594:
546:
534:
533:
532:
512:
501:
489:
477:86.143.162.134
467:
451:
450:
449:
424:
423:
422:
421:
420:
419:
418:
367:
341:
324:
323:
322:
312:
291:
270:
269:
268:
267:
266:
212:
193:
192:
191:
170:
157:
136:
121:
120:
119:
102:
101:
64:
62:Anna Svidersky
59:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
624:
612:
610:
605:
599:
598:
592:
588:
584:
583:
582:
578:
574:
571:
569:
563:
559:
555:
550:
547:
545:
542:
538:
535:
530:
525:
524:
523:
520:
516:
513:
510:
505:
502:
500:
497:
493:
490:
486:
482:
478:
474:
468:
466:
463:
461:
455:
452:
448:
445:
440:
437:
436:
435:
432:
428:
425:
417:
414:
410:
406:
405:
400:
396:
392:
391:
390:
387:
382:
378:
377:
376:
373:
368:
366:
362:
358:
354:
353:
352:
349:
345:
342:
340:
337:
332:
328:
325:
321:
318:
313:
308:
307:
306:
303:
299:
295:
294:Strong Delete
292:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
271:
265:
261:
257:
252:
248:
247:
246:
243:
238:
237:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
213:
211:
208:
205:
201:
197:
194:
189:
184:
183:
182:
179:
174:
171:
169:
166:
161:
158:
156:
153:
148:
144:
140:
137:
135:
131:
127:
123:
122:
118:
115:
113:â Ăy§ep§ion â
109:
104:
103:
100:
97:
93:
92:
91:
90:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
63:
60:
58:
57:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
603:
600:
567:
548:
536:
514:
503:
491:
459:
453:
426:
404:The Guardian
402:
398:
394:
343:
331:The Guardian
330:
326:
293:
272:
250:
221:, nor is it
214:
199:
195:
172:
159:
146:
138:
76:
66:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
554:Polly Klaas
527:new user -
327:Please note
186:new user -
160:Strong keep
413:Rockpocket
204:Rockpocket
456:notable.
50:Mackensen
529:contribs
485:contribs
473:unsigned
386:Tyrenius
336:Tyrenius
223:Wikinews
188:contribs
165:Tyrenius
587:Rossami
568:ALKIVAR
509:Fiwtart
504:Comment
496:Yuckfoo
444:Crum375
357:Rossami
348:Crum375
344:Comment
317:Crum375
256:Rossami
242:Crum375
227:Rossami
178:Fiwtart
152:Crum375
77:No vote
591:(talk)
537:Delete
519:Ktbaby
439:WP:NOT
427:Delete
416:(talk)
409:WP:WEB
361:(talk)
296:. Per
273:Delete
260:(talk)
231:(talk)
215:Delete
207:(talk)
200:per se
143:WP:BIO
126:Stifle
81:Stifle
69:WP:MFD
53:(talk)
460:Grue
395:et al
372:Mitch
302:Mitch
96:Mitch
16:<
556:and
549:Keep
515:Keep
492:keep
481:talk
454:Keep
431:Peta
381:NPOV
277:Angr
196:Keep
173:Keep
147:live
145:for
139:Keep
130:talk
85:talk
564:.
487:) .
225:.
71:by
483:â˘
411:.
399:is
287:)
283:â˘
251:is
132:)
87:)
79:.
573:â˘
479:(
285:c
281:t
279:(
128:(
83:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.