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.
Keep. The sources used here are The Guardian, BBC News, ITV News, and The Independent - not a single one which is a tabloid.
WP:SENSATIONAL does not apply. 9News, the last source used, could be a tabloid, but even if it was, broad coverage by non-tabloids has been demonstrated. Furthermore, missing white woman syndrome isn't a valid reason to dismiss an article because 1) the term is used to highlight that non-white women deserve more coverage, not that white women deserve less, and 2) it's not Wikipedia's job trying to fix social issues.
Cortador (
talk) 23:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree with everything @
Cortador said. There is, to my knowledge, no such as thing as WP: Missing White Women Syndrome even if this concept denotes a very real thing.
Wickster12345 (
talk) 08:15, 21 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:NOTNEWS,
WP:N, and
WP:NEVENTS. All sources are primary sources that amount to routine news coverage. Notability requires secondary sources.
Thebiguglyalien (
talk) 23:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC)reply
Comment. To add to my rationale, this article fails
WP:NOTNEWS. It is a
run-of-the-mill missing person case that lacks
persistence beyond the news cycle and will not have a
lasting effect, beyond her friends and family. I also agree with Thebiguglyalien.
voorts (
talk/
contributions) 23:54, 19 January 2024 (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.