This is an example of the systemic bias we find here in Wikipedia and how media triggered many of these articles come into existence See when we have a bunch of unemployed and kids sitting in front of their computers along with their televisions turned on and when they run into an spectacularly popular news event then everyone flocks to write and comment articles like this one The fact that their disappearance was not documented here in Wikipedia is simply because none of us gave a shit about it but now that most news have reported it then we all have the need to worry and work on this article because let s face it most of us in here are media whores that develop a sense of importance by restricting and telling other users what and how things should be executed by displaying our knowledge of Wikipedia guidelines The reality is that their disappearance was an important event and was covered but their notability here in Wikipedia was probably questioned because either no one cared to worry about something that wasn t being widely covered or because people were too busy fixing Lady Gaga s article Regardless the above restriction to my opinion and how some Wikipedians are quick to jump me by pointing out the logical name for this article shows the hypocrisy that we have to deal with when sometimes there is a more straight forward solution to an article that if it wasn t because of its popularity by the media frenzy it would make it so unnoticeable to the editors at large that at the end a discussion about the title would be something no one would care for Thanks