Deletion of Murder of Meredith Kercher

Comment: per , consistent with the conclusions reached here - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emily Sander. That's the Wikipedia line, but as I've said before - ''"I believe that it's a depressing prospect that sensation lovers are leading an encyclopedia by the nose. Allowing the media to determine what is and isn't notable is a bad joke.... I bet we wouldn't be having this arguement if it was an ugly middle aged man who had been murdered. I think that WP needs to establish a specific guideline - I've no idea how to go about it."'' -- John
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY)

Comment: well sourced and coverage has extended over time. We don't have a guideline on crime articles outside of #NEWS and it is hairy to untangle the notable ones because even minor crimes can receive "it bleeds, it leads" headline coverage in unrelated places, especially if they involve apparently sympathetic victims, extensive mystery, or (in this case, it would seem) an man bites dog (journalism)|attractive and unconventional suspect. In this case we have the quite rare circumstance of international coverage in at least three or four countries due to the diverse participants
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: Whilst #NEWS should apply, the arguments of the two editors above me I also kind of agree with. Connections to internet culture though? What do you mean
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)