Deletion of Emily J. Hilscher

Comment: not notable outside of the manner of her death, |WP:NOT a memorial, rumors of association with killer found to be false. No reason to have a separate article. &spades
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:MEMORIAL)

Comment: See Jeff Silvers' comment above. Copy it to a subpage in your userspace and recreate ''if and when'' Emily has a book written about her or some other notable legacy. I am usually a strong M:Inclusionism|inclusionist but this is clear |recentism
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Recentism (WP:RECENTISM)

Comment: or '''Merge'''.  a memorial
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: As has been noted above isnt it time to call this 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS is the unacceptable argument that since there are other articles which fail  we should add yet another
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: to Virginia Tech massacre, |not notable before the event. #MEMORIAL|Wikipedia is not a memorial, and we do not need articles for all the victims of this event - only those who would meet  without this having happened or some time after the event. The closing admin should note that many of the keep votes are various forms of  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO||WP:NOT||WP:BIO||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: Keep''' / '''Merge''' At the risk of treading into  territory, I think it's important to note that victims of many less notable violent crimes are well-represented on Wikipedia, many of whose articles have withstood AfD debates, even if books haven't been written about them.  Paul Bernardo's victims, Laci Peterson, and every once of Jack the Ripper's victims.  Sure, their names have popped up in plenty of books, but are they notable on their own?  That seems to be the question.  By the most literal interpretation of Wikipedia's standards, (i.e., "multiple, non-trivial sources") it would appear that they are.  This is an open debate, not your own personal torch to carry.  It is very likely that this young lady's name will appear alongside the names of all the other victims in countless books to come, and that is the sole reason why I am voting the way I am.  It has nothing to do with memorializing, and shame on anyone who would presume that to be the only motive behind a vote to keep or merge.  It has only to do with an accurate reflection of history, and an interest in being thorough
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS)

Comment: A quick run through of the !votes came up with the following: 23 keep, 22 merge including merge & delete, and 74 delete including redirects.  Is it about time to call this one 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Snowball clause (WP:SNOW)

Comment: I'd like to expand upon my original argument. A lot of people are bringing up . All this states is that "Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be notable besides being fondly remembered." The article is not about her being fondly remembered, and the sources talk about her beyond being fondly remembered. She's noteable for something beyond being fondly remembered. so  doesn't really apply
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:MEMORIAL||WP:MEMORIAL)

Comment: per norm, also per  memorial
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: As per per , I feel this isn't enough to justify a wiki. The important details surrounding her are already highlighted on in the main Virginia Tech Massacre article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: don't merge) per nom, #MEMORIAL, and precedents
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per .  We decided years ago not to have articles on victims of murders, we don't have articles on the people killed in the 9/11 attacks, the columbine attacks, etc
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:MEMORIAL)

Comment: per all of the above and . If kept,  provide pages for every 9/11 victim
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:MEMORIAL)

Comment: and don't merge anywhere - textbook #MEMORIAL, "notable" only in death. &mdash
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: per , what importance does she have other than her (awful) death? Would she herself be remembered 400 years from now or only as a side-note on the whole tragedy
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTE)

Comment: WP:MEMORIAL, and lots of people here are using the pointless defenses of  and , not policies mind you but still essays that make a damn good point
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS||WP:FISHING)

Comment: per , OT
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:NOT)