Deletion of Neda Agha-Soltan

Comment: As this AfD enters its seventh day, I (the nominator) would have no |reason to complain if it were closed as "keep" and continued on article talk as a merge discussion. I'm ''not'' formally requesting a nomination withdrawal (which actually could be in bad taste at this point), but I'm willing to concede that it's had its moment in the AfD sun. Or, to invoke another toasty image, I don't want to keep a discussion at AfD if it's not actually an Af'''''D''''' discussion and doesn't stand |a snowball's chance in hell of becoming one
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DRV||WP:SNOW)

Comment: into the article about the notable event (her death.) I am not impressed by  arguments. There are undoubtedly numerous other memorial articles or articles about someone known only for stopping a bullet or otherwise being a victim of circumstances which should be moved to "Death of..." titles. Her death has been chosen and promoted as a symbol of the popular uprising. She was apparently just standing in the wrong place at the wrong time and caught a random bullet. Per  and per  a biography or memorial article is not appropriate. Her life was cut short, before she had any opportunity to have a   career or otherwise do something to satisfy . She is notable only for unintentionally stopping a bullet and someone being around with a camera phone to record the aftermath
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:BLP1E||WP:NOT||WP:BIO)

Comment: and  ffs
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: Many of you probably know this, but as a couple people have pointed out here (and as I have had a surprisingly difficult time explaining in previous AfDs), "merge and delete" is not an option (because deletion would disrupt the "paper trail" that needs to be kept intact following a merge). If by "merge and delete" someome means, in effect, "merge X into Y, and then clear X of its contents and replace those contents with a an automatic redirect to Y", then one is not indicating  at all, but rather a standard . I worded my nomination so as to suggest why I feel that deletion is preferable to merging. Of course, anyone is welcome to disagree, and to suggest that merging (or something else) is preferable to deletion; but those who are inclined to use the words "merge" and "delete" in the same !vote are advised to avoid making the erroneous implication that  and  can be applied simultaneously to a given article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:DELETION||WP:MERGE||WP:MERGE||WP:DELETE)

Comment: Step one: Is Neda's life story notable, yes? or no? If yes, then move on to step two....T''here is no firm policy on the inclusion of obscure branches of popular culture subjects. ''... Well-referenced and well-written articles on obscure topics are from time to time deleted as well, but such deletions are controversial.'' It is also worth noting that many articles on relatively obscure topics are featured articles.''---''''''Step two: Would breaking the biography and the event into separate articles serve Wikipedia's purposes in this instance, yes or no? If yes, then keep.The key to avoiding information overload is to break an article down into more than one page...''. These can start out as section headings and be broken out into separate pages as the main article becomes too long. ''...''Wikipedia is not a general knowledge base of any and all information, full of railroad timetables and comprehensive lists. But ''any encyclopedic subject of interest should be covered, in whatever depth is possible.---'''META:Wiki is not paper#Organization|META:WIKI IS NOT PAPER#ORGANIZATION'''That is, to make sure our readers' eyes don't glaze over with coverage of peripheral detail extraneous to the precise topic being covered within an article, we break out extensive coverage being given some related matter or issue into separate articles, being sure to include only the pertinent details therefrom into that article's parent.Conclusion: Since I believe Neda is herself notable, along with the event of her shooting, and since I further believe that too exensive of  details about her shooting wouldn't optimally fit in her specific Wikipedia biography and that too extensive of details about her biography wouldn't optimally fit in an article about her shooting, I therefore believe that this article should be saved
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fancruft (WP:FAN)

Comment: I agree with anonymous. I think Agha-Soltan's life and death have been sufficiently covered by the international media that the article (as I voted above) should be merged into one article entitled Neda Agha-Soltan. She may have initially been simply a  individual, but when the international media started to scrutinize every tidbit and detail of her life and when the oppositional leaders, United States President and other notable international individuals begin invoking her name (for good or bad), she has become more than just a "Death of...", or "One event" individual. When Iranian government authorities directed Agha-Soltan's family to remove the black mourning banners that were hanging outside their residence to prevent the home from becoming a place of pilgrimage, when Mehdi Karroubi and Mir-Hossein Mousavi called upon Iranian citizens to commemorate Agha-Soltan in protest - then she has already become someone who is notable for more than just "one event". She may have become notable in death, but her death has ''already'' left a legacy that is worthy of a page simply titled '''Neda Agha-Soltan
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEVENT)

Comment: I think in this case  can be ignored per , at least, that's what I think
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:IAR)

Comment: per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ONEEVENT)

Comment: per , and redirect namespace to 'Death of ...'  article. There appears to be nothing worth keeping in the article which is not already in the 'Death' article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)