Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murder of Elaine O'Hara
Per  and, in particular, . On the former, GNG is more than satisfied. On the latter, the case (and the defence's claims on the legal basis used to capture/use the mobile phone data) has already had a lasting effect. And could have further effect. Nationally. And potentially further afield. On the lasting effects already seen, the case led (directly and indirectly) to a http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Review_of_the_Law_on_Retention_of_and_Access_to_Communications_Data.pdf/Files/Review_of_the_Law_on_Retention_of_and_Access_to_Communications_Data.pdf review of the underlying legislation (the 2011 Act) and https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/state-agencies-audited-over-access-to-phone-records-1.2733206 changes to how state agencies use the data captured under that act. On the lasting effects that may yet be seen (and have already been reported), the planned appeal claims are expected to be relevant to case law, precedent and the validity of the Communications (Retention of Data) Act 2011 itself. (And any other cases which have already or may in future rely on mobile phone evidence captured by the Gardaí). The  effects already seen (the review of the existing law and how agencies rely on that law), and the lasting effects potentially in the offing (the potential impact to the Act itself) are both well reported. Though they hadn't actually been represented in the article, I have https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Murder_of_Elaine_O%27Hara&type=revision&diff=819801408&oldid=819779623 since added it
— User:Guliolopez, 10:25, 11 January 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:LASTING (Wikipedia:Notability)