Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Disappearance of Eldor Alfred Pearson

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:10, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disappearance of Eldor Alfred Pearson

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I realise that this thing has citations but we're not a missing persons database and, really, there doesn't seem to be any substance to this article beyond routine reports. There is nothing to verify inclusion in Category:Crime in Saskatchewan. Does it really meet the spirit of WP:GNG ? Sitush (talk) 12:23, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We have loads of similar articles but, of course, some are clearly worthy of inclusion, eg: Disappearance of Etan Patz. - Sitush (talk) 12:32, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nothing to show that this is more than a run-of-the mill disappearance case.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are lots of others like this, eg: Disappearance of Carlease Simms. - Sitush (talk) 14:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:13, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Indeed, we're not a missing persons database and this is a run-of-the-mill disappearance case, as John Pack Lampart states. Perhaps the article creator can explain how he feels this meets WP:GNG?Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:18, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject fails WP:VICTIM (if there was foul play) as well as WP:ANYBIO. Chris Troutman (talk) 15:30, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- The article repeats the content of his (1971) entry in List of people who disappeared mysteriously, which is a very long article, where each person listed has a substantive article. My preference might have been to redirect to the list entry, but that would make him the one person in that list who does not have an article. The question thus may be whether his paragraph should also be deleted from the list article. Peterkingiron (talk) 10:23, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If the article is deleted then I would remove it from the list also, per WP:NLIST. Merely happening is not a reason for inclusion there. However, I am aware that there is a bit of a walled garden involving lists/articles/categories, whereby the existence of one is assumed by some people to merit the existence of both others. IMO, that creates a circularity of dubious notability. - Sitush (talk) 12:08, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Sourcing in article is not enough. Little additional sourcing in a BEFORE.Icewhiz (talk) 07:41, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very little strong reliable sourcing to get him over WP:GNG — this is based almost entirely on missing persons organizations' own primary source content, not media coverage. As noted above, we are not a missing persons database — while I'm not about to undertake a comprehensive project of reviewing every single article listed in List of people who disappeared mysteriously, I have extremely strong doubts that the other instances listed there necessarily all pass our notability standards either. Some do, sure — but I strongly suspect that many don't. Bearcat (talk) 03:39, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.