Deletion of Natalie Khawam

Comment: Wikipedia is |not a newspaper, and has different standards for who we have articles about. There have been lots of breathless and prurient tabloidish articles about the breaking news story. That is not the stuff a good encyclopedia is made of. Clear case of . If she and her sister in the future become as frequently on the covers of supermarket tabloids as the Kardashians, then we can reconsider
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: nbsp; Deletion nominations should take care to protect the material in our encyclopedia, as we are here to build an encyclopedia.&nbsp; One way they can do this is by analyzing the |WP:Alternatives to deletion.&nbsp; The current nomination argument shows no content deriving from WP:BEFORE.&nbsp; Nor does it expand on the basic theory of how Wikipedia deals with the combination of a non-notable topic and reliable material about that non-notable topic.&nbsp; This deficiency is so great in this case that because of the alternatives to deletion that are available, there is no deletion to discuss here, either of the redirect or the edit history.&nbsp; Any close here other then keep or speedy keep will encourage more defective nominations and more wasted time by AfD volunteers.&nbsp
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Deletion policy (WP:ATD)