Deletion of Kate McCann

Comment: to Disappearance of Madeleine McCann. I don't see how she's notable unless she is guilty - and we '''definitely''' shouldn't be speculating as to whether she is or not: doing so is a huge breach of . There's nothing really worth merging in to the article that isn't already there (and anything that is separate from the topic of the disappearance is unsourced, anyway
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP)

Comment: to disappearance article, per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: The arguments for "Keep" seem to assume no information about her will be in Wikipedia if the article goes. All that will happen is that the article will get an automatic redirect to the article about the event, in keeping with  and therefore nothing will be lost. Nobody cares about her except in relation to the case of the missing child, therefore it is unreasonable to have an article about her when all that we would ever want to know about her would be covered in the missing-child article. Anyone who types her name into the Wikipedia search box should be automatically redirected to the article on the case
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: To paraphrase nom, "a classic case" of a Merge proposal being brought unnecessarily to AfD.  has been cited as requiring a merge due to notability solely for one event. Let's read #Articles about living people notable only for one event carefully: ''The bare fact that someone has been in the news does not in itself imply that they should be the subject of an encyclopedia entry.'' - OK does not necessarily imply. ''Where a person is mentioned by name in a Wikipedia article about a larger subject, but remains of essentially low profile themselves, we should generally avoid having an article on them.'' Generally avoid -- if they are of low profile. Surely, we can all agree that Mrs. McCann is no longer low-profile. ''If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted.'' Note the use of unlikely. A carefully sourced bio on her seems appropriate. On the other hand, I'm not saying this is a licence to libel. I agree that we must careful to consider: ''Marginal biographies on people with no independent notability can give undue weight to the events in the context of the individual''  —Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:BLP1E)