From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 ( talk) 01:50, 17 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Jayne MacDonald

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Jayne MacDonald (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia:"Murder of" articles states that murder victims do not get articles unless separately notable. — billinghurst sDrewth 03:48, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Lightburst ( talk) 15:54, 9 September 2020 (UTC) reply

I can't even believe we are having this discussion in 2020. There is nothing notable about the murderer outside of the fact he was a murderer yet we are left with a written biography detailing his entire life while his victims are either objectified by a "murder of" article are left to be a black word list on the Wikipedia biography of their murderer. It's sickening and disturbing. Tsistunagiska ( talk) 16:36, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Also, I would like to point out that Wikipedia:"Murder of" articles is an essay and not Wikipedia policy therefore, while it is perfectly fine to include it in discussion it should not be considered anything more than an essay. It is not a guideline, policy or requirement when creating an article. This is just further evidence of systemic bias against women and a notable young innocent who became the face of, as my friend SusunW so eloquently points out, " everywoman" after her murder. Tsistunagiska ( talk) 16:47, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I am adamantly opposed to the deletion of this article as I believe she meets the requirements for notability. Tsistunagiska ( talk) 17:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

Comment—Tsistunagiska, !vote “keep” or “delete” to make life easier for whomever determines consensus... 😉 Montanabw (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply

  • Keep, she was the victim whose murder broke the case. As such, she was unique and not merely a face in the crowd. I would reluctantly live with moving to a “murder of” title, but I hate the objectification inherent in those titling conventions. So 1. keep as named, or 2, keep,with a different title. Montanabw (talk) 17:04, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep ( edit conflict) I came here after reading Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red#Jayne_MacDonald_and_wider_women's_issues where there is a very good discussion going on. I would say a few things myself here, though. First of all, the nom is citing an essay as if it's policy. In addition, this is not a one event situation and the victim does have notability. The murder of this young person led to a change in society. If that's not notable, I can't imagine what is. It's a horrible way for that to happen, but the fact is that because of this victim, many changes occurred among the police, in journalism and was taken up in a feminist response. I think that what Tsistunagiska brings up about the way we handle murderers vs victims is a problem, but until we change Wikipedia policy, we have to go with what we have. I support a change in the way we write about murderers and victims, especially in the sense that there is evidence that some people enact violence in order to become immortalized in history. The lack of attention to victims is a problem that should be addressed. As for this article in particular, I believe that the subject of the article passes GNG for coverage over time and also for the legacy that she left behind. Megalibrarygirl ( talk) 17:10, 11 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep per @ Montanabw and Megalibrarygirl. -- Rosiestep ( talk) 01:13, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Delete She's about as notable as Sutcliffe's other victims. Jayne's mother being the first to successfully sue a murderer for committing murder doesn't make Jayne notable either. Dougal18 ( talk) 15:52, 12 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • Keep I think Montanabw and Megalibrarygirl make good points. The sourcing is adequate, the victim has a distinguished status, and even if essays were binding (they're not), this would be a case for renaming or merging, not deletion. XOR'easter ( talk) 20:10, 16 September 2020 (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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jayne_MacDonald&oldid=978806815"