Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karmein Chan 2
as per my comments at the AfD for Ebony Simpson, this case dates from 1991 and 1991 cases are less likely to attract google hits than more recent cases - this was a very major news story for a long period of time - significantly more notable in my view based on coverage particularly by the tabloid press and women's magazines than say the Brian Burke scandal which Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board#Brian Burke scandal|somebody thinks worthy of an article.  io states ''A topic is notable if it has been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, independent of the subject and independent of each other.''  I am disappointed that deletion debates focus on what people think might be notable rather than actual independent objective criteria.  The Karmein Chan case was the subject of many many newspaper and magazine stories.  I have difficulty with comments from people who were too young and/or not in Australia who would be unable to judge the amount of coverage this topic received.If they can't judge on that basis then they need to use the objective criterion provided by io is that she meets the notability threshold.  Notwithstanding these comments, I accept that as at the Ebony Simpson AfD, this article might be better merged with that of the murderer and discuss the murder and aftermath
— User:Golden, 19:57, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:B (Wikipedia:Bots)