Bobby cutts dating web page
The disappearance of a full-term pregnant woman and massive search effort is what made this story become noteworthy.
Even if Jessie Davis had been found alive and well the saga would have merited a Wikipedia entry for the disappearance and well-publicized manhunt organized by her family.
Our standard practice is to change such articles into articles about the event.
If you feel the event is not notable and should not be the subject of an article, no one is stopping you from listing it for deletion.
But if the article is about the incident (disappearance/murder), then that incident is indeed notable (and the proposed deletion was withdrawn). (Joseph ASpadaro , 25 June 2007 (UTC)) What sort of sense does that possibly make, though? It's not like the sources for either of the combined articles were really different from the sources for this combined article -- they're all covering one event.
This feels strongly like WP: SHOPPING to me, and I'm not sure that the handling of these matters has been above board, from the bold merging of articles in Af D to the closing of those Af D debates as "withdrawn" by an admin who started them without a procedural re-listing of this article. Erechtheus , 25 June 2007 (UTC) The addition of the biographies of living persons warning atop this talk page seems to stress once again that we're really dealing with biographical material in this article.
Beyond that, the lack of articles on "Disappearance and murder of Chandra Levy" or "Disappearance and murder of Laci Peterson" strongly suggests that this is indeed an attempt at sidestepping these serious biography issues in what I would conclude is a violation of the spirit of even having biographical notability guidelines.
Night Gyr (talk/Oy) , 25 June 2007 (UTC) What good would that do when we have this talk page as a resource to try to reach a consensus outside of that process?
We got here because of a rush to create biographies and a rush to sidestep the deletion process the first time it was started.