Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Keith Sapsford
Prodded improperly without a valid rationale.   does not say to delete anything – its point is whether to focus on the incident or the individual.  This incident is certainly notable because there has been continuing coverage over 50 years.  It happened in 1970 and so there was naturally detailed coverage at the time.  A decade later, it is detailed in ''Photojournalism: The Professionals' Approach''.  Another decade later and it is detailed in ''Picture Editing & Layout: A Guide to Better Visual Communication''.  Another decade later, it's in ''Trapped''.  And then 50 years later, it's in the press  such as the ''https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/stowaways-bad-idea-tragic-story-behind-falling-boy-photo-that-shocked-sydney-and-the-world/SDLNOL3DEIXDOOGTLGPVHJQ4PI/ NZ Herald''.  Someone creates an article and it is prodded for "uncontroversial deletion" with a nonsensical rationale.  Our actual applicable policies include , ,  and 
— user:Andrew, 12:48, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:BIO1E||WP:ATD||WP:BITE||WP:NOTPAPER||WP:PRESERVE (Wikipedia:Notability)