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 keep. Wifione ^Message 22:10, 11 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rekha Kumari-Baker (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Woman who murdered her children and is now in prison. Classic WP:BLP1E. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:49, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep - Notable not just because of the brutal and pre-meditated murders of her children, but also because of the length minimum sentence which was "one of the longest jail terms given to a woman in the UK in modern times". BLP1E states "if that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them". The BBC ref already discusses Kumari-Baker alongside the likes of Beverley Allitt, Rose West and Myra Hindley, all of whom already have articles. Additionally, the later of these is deceased and Allitt is held at Rampton Secure Hospital whereas Kumari-baker was deemed to be in an healthy mental state (aside from very minor depression). Allitt also received a shorter minimum term of 30 years, so Kumari-Baker's tariff is second only to West's in terms of living British female prisoners. There's also the issue of wider child protection issues with people expressing concerns about the perpetrator before the crime and the murders resulting in a serious case review. Her crimes have already received coverage in this book discussing empathy [1] by Simon Baron-Cohen--Shakehandsman (talk) 04:37, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It hardly seems relevant to point out that the BBC has mentioned other women sentenced to long prison terms in an article about Kumari-Baker's sentencing. That is part of the one event that we are discussing here. Likewise, if Baron-Cohen mentions her, it is almost certainly in relation to this event. In and of itself, this is a tragic though unremarkable crime and has had no visible effect on law, policy, etc. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 13:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Child killings are not automatically notable. This article as it remains can't stay under the womans name and needs moving to Murder of Davina and Jasmine Kumari-Baker. Although crimes against children are especially upsetting to all the question remains, is this double murder notable? Wikipedia:Notability (events) seems to be the related notability guideline. I had never heard of this double murder so I will have a search around to see what results it returns. Youreallycan (talk) 13:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Are the names of the victims more discussed and more identifiable of this topic than the name of the killer? I doubt that. postdlf (talk) 16:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Probably not. This woman is not "highly notable" as you can see by looking at the article and citations currently in it. As to whether she's "notable enough" for an article under her own name I am undecided. Youreallycan (talk) 15:16, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. This would be better analyzed under WP:NOTNEWS rather than WP:BLP1E. This is far from a "classic" BLP1E, in that the subject is not a private person only incidentally caught up in a larger newsworthy event not of their own making (as an article on her husband would be). Instead, the "event" of the murder (really a rather facile word to use here) was solely her own intentional conduct. And to further roll into that the highly publicized trial and her apparently historically significant sentence really stretches the word "event" out of all reasonable meaning. A crime such as this is really a biographical one, in that who she was in relation to the victims, her motive for for killing them, and her trial and incarceration afterward is the real story; the method of exactly how she killed her daughters, though relevant, is just a small part of the story that is much less important by comparison (this isn't an elaborate bank robbery such that the commission of the crime gets the greatest weight in the story). Currently the article doesn't even have any discussion of her possible motives, despite information on that; I hope that hasn't been intentionally excluded because to do so would be to completely misunderstand the nature of the subject and how best to write about it.

  So in my view, the only question is whether there is lasting significance and sustained coverage of her such that this would not just be routine news coverage. There's at least a prima facie case for that, and no actual counterargument so far, so I'd like to see more discussion on that point. postdlf (talk) 16:02, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In regard to you comment about the missing motives I agree with you. The current weight of the article seems to be directed unduly at the social services and their responsibility - of which they actually had none. - Youreallycan (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I fully agree that plenty of content is missing from the article and also agree the motives need plenty of coverage.--Shakehandsman (talk) 02:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep The killings, the trial, and subsequent legal proceedings have had significant coverage in news publications in several countries from 2007 through 2011, per Google News archives, satisfying the notability requirements. Edison (talk) 16:25, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'd just like to highlight the timing of this nomination, with it occurring very soon after i had an entirely unrelated exchange on the BLP noticeboard with both Delicious carbuncle and User:Youreallycan. The former has also now nominated a further very notable article I created for deletion [2] and their rationale contains rather unhelpful comments to say the least.--Shakehandsman (talk) 17:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:09, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Has recieved significant coverage by news media.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Further Comment I've now started an ANI in relation to the conduct of the submitter of the two AFDs. It can be found here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Wikihounding.2C_attack_and_disruptive_editing_by_Delicious_carbuncle

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.