Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eve Carson
Wikipedia's Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline|general notability guideline states thatA '''topic''' is ''presumed'' to be notable if it has received significant coverage in Wikipedia:Reliable sources|reliable sources that are Wikipedia:Verifiability#Sources|independent of the subject.The extensive media coverage of Eve Carson in multiple reliable sources cited in Eve_Carson#Notes and Eve_Carson#External_links clearly establishes a presumption of the notability of this person pursuant to the criteria established in the Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline|general notability guideline.  While #MEMORIAL is often misinterpreted to imply that "subjects whose notability is derived solely from the manner of their deaths are not notable for Wikipedia's purposes", the plain language of #MEMORIAL clarifies its purposeWikipedia is not the place to honor departed friends and relatives. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must be Wikipedia:Notability (people)|notable besides being fondly remembered.Thus, #MEMORIAL is a mere restatement of the applicability of Wikipedia's notability guidelines to deceased subjects, and does actually furnish independent grounds for deletion.  #NEWS has also been advanced as an argument for deletion.  Whatever the merits of ever raising #NEWS in any deletion discussion without claiming serious  issues#NEWS was http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not&diff=prev&oldid=134171531 added to  during the controversy surrounding the events considered in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff, admonishes editors to "keep in mind the harm our work might cause", and advises that "While Wikipedia strives to be comprehensive, the policies on Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons|biographies of living persons and Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutral point of view should lead us to contextualize events appropriately, which may preclude a biography about someone who is not an encyclopedic subject, despite a brief appearance in the news."  The extent to which #NEWS ''ever'' applies to ''any'' articles other than biographies of living persons that present a substantial risk of causing serious embarrassment, humiliation, or other harm to their subjects is therefore doubtful.  Archetypical of the sort of article that clearly qualifies for deletion under WP#NOT:NEWS would be a biography of a person whose sole claim to notability is an arrest for driving while intoxicated, where the event was only covered in two local newspapers., #NEWS clearly does not furnish a valid rationale for deletion here.  Indeed, #NEWS expressly states that "topics in the news may also be encyclopedic subjects when the sources are substantial"; the massive media coverage of Eve Carson cited in Eve_Carson#Notes and Eve_Carson#External_links would therefore suggest that this person is, indeed, an "encyclopedic subject". 1E arguments do not support deletion, since the policy expressly advises us to "Cover the event, not the person": as we presently have no article on the Death of Eva Carson, it would be far more efficient to move this article to a page title descriptive of the event in question, and adjust the style of the writing where appropriate, than to write a completely new article relating to the event.  The purely subjective assertions of non-notability advanced by editors supporting deletion of this article fail to outweigh the presumption of notability established via the Wikipedia:Notability#General_notability_guideline|general notability guideline through objective evidence
— NONE, NONE
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:BLP||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:NOT||WP:BLP1E (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)