513:. The keep on the AfD on Gregerson occurred shortly after the girl was murdered, over two years ago, and was undoubtedly a germane case at the time. What I don't see in googling is an ongoing high profile status of this event, or some legislative or societal effect from the case. Outside of the fact that this was a tragic murder, the article does not assert the notability of the murder, even if it was a huge community search in a Mormon town. When you eliminate "blog", "wiki", "wordpress", "forum" and "blogspot" from the google search, the gross number of hits drops to just a bit over 2700, some of which are duplicates, and the majority of which are from the time of the murder. I'm not unsympathetic (or in fact unempathetic) to the murder of a child or its short term local newsworthiness, however beyond the time frame surrounding the case, what continues to make it notable? In the examples given by
344:. Take away 5,000 because ghits aren't conclusive.....You're left 5,000. She is notable. As for why her murder became notable while other murders did not: She was six-year old at the time of the murder; as the article states - huge search teams in the community went out to search for her; the Mormon community historically has a very low crime rate. These are some of the factors that made this murder notable over other murders. --
534:. A legislative or societal effect is not prerequisite to notability. Substantial coverage in reliable sources is a pre and end requisite to notability, and this case easily meets that criteria. I'm not saying that it didn't have a societal effect on its community. As a matter of fact, it probably did. The very fact that it was covered so substantially is
517:, three of those cases are new and even ongoing, at least one of which is fairly sensational. However, once they fade from current news, will they continue to have a notable effect? The fourth, Jaidyn Leskie, has resulted in activism by the mother and a constant presence with a kit being released to assist in choosing babysitters.
567:
notable. A situation in point would be the majority of victims from the
Columbine massacre. Some have articles, at least those whose individual deaths had effects after the event (Cassie Bernall, Rachel Scott, for example), but the rest don't. The argument that blog and forum discussions indicate
562:
I won't keep arguing this. However, I have a real issue with articles covering victims of crimes in this way that don't have wide-ranging effects. There are so many, and on a local level, murders, especially grisly ones or those that effect children, tend to get a larger measure of local news
568:
notability doesn't hold in my view, since they aren't considered notable for purposes of sourcing. But in any case, I don't believe the article, as it currently stands, establishes notability. Right now, it is little more than a news item and needs to be expanded in order to show notability
208:
Got it, thanks. For some reason I misunderstood your comment as 'if you search on the murder, you find hits on the murder' and that's why I was confused. I agree that she wasn't notable prior to disappearing and if she hadn't, we'd never have heard of her, but the same probably applies for
626:. Do we use proposed policies and guidelines as criteria when they haven't yet been accepted? I am wholly supportive of the institution of notability guidelines in these criminal and victim biographies. It's an issue that needs addressing.
229:. While the latter is special because he spawned a TV show and this does border on an OSE argument, I think we have enough consensus on en.wiki that these people are notable. Not that I personally agree, but I really
404:
541:
The elimination of a few thousand links is unfair. The fact that this case was so widely discussed in blogs and forums is proof of notability. And besides, 2700 ghits is nothing to sneeze at. --
136:
While this is certainly a sad incident, it isn't clear how this is more notable than hundreds of other murders each year. The article doesn't establish why it is notable enough for retention.
340:. Some murders and surrounding circumstances are notable and some aren't. This murder obviously is notable. Before we explain why, let me first set the record stragiht: She churns out almost
482:
321:
129:
96:
91:
100:
677:
703:
83:
269:
unless they're written by someone with an immediate connection, they'e clear secondary sources, which is part of why I don't understand TPH's vote yet.
378:. In other words, if there are 100,000 g-hits but we have not found reliable sources, it should be deleted, if I understand the guidelines right :) -
602:
233:
would like to see something resembling consiststency in AfDs. That said, the article does need some clean-up but that can be easily fixed.
17:
87:
341:
548:
492:
351:
55:
718:
692:
661:
635:
614:
585:
557:
526:
501:
457:
435:
417:
393:
360:
330:
296:
275:
257:
239:
199:
183:
165:
145:
65:
324:
off the top of my head, and I know there are many others. I think some crimes are notable but not all, I'm undecided here.
563:
coverage. Unless they result in publication or coverage beyond the time and scope of the event, I am not convinced they
79:
71:
734:
36:
655:. Ideally none should be used as an absolute, but rather as a basis. We're never going to have total uniformity.
192:
What I mean is, if you search for the names of the people, the only relevant hits tie right into this incident.
733:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
292:
253:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
656:
514:
412:
325:
270:
234:
178:
631:
581:
522:
431:
309:
141:
474:
553:
497:
449:
385:
356:
648:
610:
288:
249:
193:
159:
52:
652:
627:
577:
518:
427:
137:
714:
688:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
177:
Wouldn't all news sources re: the disappearance be directly tied, or am I missing something?
222:
210:
426:
No, he didn't say that at all. He was just commenting on the validity of ghits in general.
375:
248:
This is a good point. Maybe news reports of an event should be considered primary sources?
155:
573:
543:
487:
444:
380:
346:
218:
214:
408:
606:
478:
49:
266:
59:
710:
684:
117:
317:
313:
226:
442:
Yup that's what I was doing; thanks, Wildhartlivie. *hands out a cookie* :) -
158:. No reliable sources found that weren't directly tied to the incident.
481:. The former has already survived an afd even prior to the merge. See
407:
in 30 seconds all from newspapers and other sources that seem to meet
370:- The number of g-hits doesn't actually matter. What matters is that
175:
No reliable sources found that weren't directly tied to the incident.
287:
A single crime, no matter how evil, is not notable by WP standards.
727:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
651:
is one often used although I see its now noted as failed, as is
576:
arguments here do that far beyond what the article itself does.
308:
not that I completely disagree, but consensus proves otherwise.
372:
attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed
483:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Craig Roger
Gregerson
322:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Isabella
Nardoni case
124:
113:
109:
105:
265:
news reports from reliable sources are a core part of
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
737:). No further edits should be made to this page.
473:. This article is the result of a merge between
411:. You're telling me you found none whatsoever?
8:
678:list of Crime-related deletion discussions
601:. This article meets the requirements for
704:list of Utah-related deletion discussions
702:: This debate has been included in the
676:: This debate has been included in the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
538:evidence of a societal effect.
1:
603:WP:Notability (criminal acts)
80:Destiny Norton disappearance
72:Destiny Norton disappearance
173:Can you clarify that, TPH?
66:17:53, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
754:
719:10:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
693:10:31, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
662:15:43, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
636:15:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
615:06:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
586:15:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
558:04:25, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
527:04:01, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
502:03:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
458:03:20, 9 August 2008 (UTC)
436:20:26, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
418:20:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
409:reliable source guidelines
394:19:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
361:03:24, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
331:03:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
297:03:09, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
276:03:20, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
258:03:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
240:12:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
200:03:22, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
184:02:54, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
166:02:37, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
146:02:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
730:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
310:Murder of Jaidyn Leskie
475:Craig Roger Gregerson
405:found more than 100
198:and his otters •
164:and his otters •
721:
707:
695:
681:
44:The result was
745:
732:
708:
698:
682:
672:
659:
551:
546:
495:
490:
454:
447:
415:
390:
383:
354:
349:
328:
273:
237:
223:Jon Benet Ramsey
211:Natalee Holloway
196:
195:Ten Pound Hammer
181:
162:
161:Ten Pound Hammer
127:
121:
103:
34:
753:
752:
748:
747:
746:
744:
743:
742:
741:
735:deletion review
728:
657:
549:
544:
493:
488:
450:
445:
413:
386:
381:
352:
347:
326:
271:
235:
219:Madeline McCann
215:Elizabeth Smart
194:
179:
160:
123:
94:
78:
75:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
751:
749:
740:
739:
723:
722:
696:
669:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
658:TravellingCari
639:
638:
618:
617:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
588:
570:in the article
539:
515:TravellingCari
505:
504:
479:Destiny Norton
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
462:
461:
460:
439:
438:
421:
420:
414:TravellingCari
364:
363:
335:
334:
333:
327:TravellingCari
300:
299:
289:Northwestgnome
281:
280:
279:
278:
272:TravellingCari
250:Northwestgnome
246:
245:
244:
243:
242:
236:TravellingCari
203:
202:
187:
186:
180:TravellingCari
168:
134:
133:
74:
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
750:
738:
736:
731:
725:
724:
720:
716:
712:
705:
701:
697:
694:
690:
686:
679:
675:
671:
670:
663:
660:
654:
650:
646:
643:
642:
641:
640:
637:
633:
629:
628:Wildhartlivie
625:
622:
621:
620:
619:
616:
612:
608:
604:
600:
597:
596:
587:
583:
579:
578:Wildhartlivie
575:
571:
566:
561:
560:
559:
556:
555:
552:
547:
540:
537:
533:
530:
529:
528:
524:
520:
519:Wildhartlivie
516:
512:
509:
508:
507:
506:
503:
500:
499:
496:
491:
484:
480:
476:
472:
469:
468:
459:
456:
455:
453:
448:
441:
440:
437:
433:
429:
428:Wildhartlivie
425:
424:
423:
422:
419:
416:
410:
406:
402:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
392:
391:
389:
384:
377:
376:WP:DEL#REASON
373:
369:
366:
365:
362:
359:
358:
355:
350:
343:
339:
336:
332:
329:
323:
319:
315:
311:
307:
304:
303:
302:
301:
298:
294:
290:
286:
283:
282:
277:
274:
268:
264:
261:
260:
259:
255:
251:
247:
241:
238:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
207:
206:
205:
204:
201:
197:
191:
190:
189:
188:
185:
182:
176:
172:
169:
167:
163:
157:
153:
150:
149:
148:
147:
143:
139:
138:Wildhartlivie
131:
126:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:
73:
70:
68:
67:
64:
63:
62:
61:the Orphanage
57:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
729:
726:
699:
673:
644:
623:
598:
574:Brewcrewer's
569:
564:
554:(yada, yada)
542:
535:
531:
510:
498:(yada, yada)
486:
470:
451:
443:
400:
387:
379:
371:
367:
357:(yada, yada)
345:
342:10,000 ghits
337:
305:
284:
262:
230:
174:
170:
151:
135:
60:
58:
45:
43:
31:
28:
647:sometimes,
536:prima facie
225:as well as
156:WP:NOT#NEWS
649:WP:SCHOOLS
403:really? I
318:Tim McLean
314:Eve Carson
227:Adam Walsh
711:• Gene93k
685:• Gene93k
653:WP:FOOTYN
607:Nrswanson
50:Aervanath
263:Disagree
130:View log
645:Comment
624:Comment
532:Comment
511:Comment
471:Comment
401:Comment
368:Comment
306:Comment
171:Comment
97:protect
92:history
550:crewer
494:crewer
446:Samuel
382:Samuel
353:crewer
285:Delete
231:really
152:Delete
125:delete
101:delete
128:) – (
118:views
110:watch
106:links
53:lives
16:<
715:talk
700:Note
689:talk
674:Note
632:talk
611:talk
599:Keep
582:talk
545:brew
523:talk
489:brew
477:and
432:talk
374:per
348:brew
338:Keep
320:and
293:talk
267:WP:V
254:talk
154:per
142:talk
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
46:Keep
706:.
680:.
565:are
452:Tan
388:Tan
221:or
717:)
691:)
634:)
613:)
584:)
572:.
525:)
485:--
434:)
316:,
312:,
295:)
256:)
217:,
213:,
144:)
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
56:in
48:--
713:(
709:—
687:(
683:—
630:(
609:(
605:.
580:(
521:(
430:(
291:(
252:(
140:(
132:)
122:(
120:)
82:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.