Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Suicide of Katelyn Davis
The main reason is the soft sourcing, not concerns about copycats etc. Any subject can be covered on Wikipedia per , but this article has always struggled to find coverage in reliable secondary sources. The case became notable because Davis livestreamed the suicide, but this in itself does not warrant an entire article. The claim by Collect that "such reportage is barred by many countries, including the EU" is dubious because British newspapers reported the incident: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/tragic-schoolgirl-12-livestreams-suicide-9608052 Mirror https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4111988/Katelyn-Nicole-Davis-12-livestreamed-committing-suicide-cops-t-stop-video-shared-online.html Mail https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2594640/girl-12-streams-her-own-suicide-on-facebook-live-for-20-minutes-after-being-sexually-abused-by-a-relative-and-cops-are-powerless-to-take-it-down/ Sun. Invoking COPPA is also dubious because the US news media is not stupid and would have checked this before reporting on the case. There is no obvious COPPA violation in reporting the suicide according to reliable news coverage, eg https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/katelyn-nicole-davis-12-year-old-kill-herself-suicide-livestream-video-live-viral-cedartown-georgia-a7523666.html here in ''The Independent'', which is a good British newspaper regularly used as a source on Wikipedia. There has been a lot of armchair lawyering over this, but the  issue from the overall sourcing is the real problem
— User:ianmacm, 05:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOTCENSORED||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)