Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jodi Arias trial

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. I suggest that those interested in renaming the article open a requested moves discussion, as while there was broad consensus that the current title isn't appropriate, there was no consensus as to what the new title should be. —Darkwind (talk) 22:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jodi Arias trial

[edit]
Jodi Arias trial (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No cited evidence of WP:Notability - although some interested locals would be clearly interested - this is a minor issue to all uninvolved Youreallycan 09:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC) Youreallycan 09:30, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See here[1] for why I titled the article the way that I did. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 10:16, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There is nothing in the article to show that it passes WP:N - it appears to be just a routine murder case of routine significance. The prediction that this is "the next Casey Anthony" is noted, but WP:CRYSTAL applies. The article can be re-created if that happens. In the event that the article is kept, it should be renamed "Murder of Travis Alexander", in line with WP:BLPCRIME. Formerip (talk) 14:49, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
FormerIP, if this were just "a routine murder case of routine significance," would it (especially if you Google "Jodi Arias") be receiving this much media attention?[2] Halo Jerk1 (talk) 21:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It's routine for murder trials to receive media attention. Also, I'm not saying it's routine (just it appears that way), because I don't know all the details. But there's nothing in the article or in the sourcing to the article that could justify keeping it. Formerip (talk) 21:11, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Murder trials don't usually receive this much media attention. Most of them obviously don't receive any media attention. So I think the article's existence is justified. Regarding the Casey Anthony comparison, it's not just a prediction that this case will be "the next Casey Anthony case." It's that sources are already calling it that because of what they see as the similarities between Casey Anthony and Jodi Arias and because of the media attention the case is receiving. See this[3] for an example. I wouldn't say that this case is yet as famous as the Casey Anthony case, though. It's obviously not. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 21:28, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename. She is innocent until proven guilty. Including material from the murder in this article would make wp the judge and jury, not a true court of law. We can have a re-direct from this to a murder article or an article on her. Just my thoughts though.--Canoe1967 (talk) 00:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Canoe1967, as long as this article is about the murder, it's going to include material about the murder. So I don't know what you mean about including that material making us judge and jury. Other articles have done the same thing while their subjects' trials were going on. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 21:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and rename to Murder of Travis Alexander. This is gaining enough attention in the media to where I think it passes notability guidelines at this point in time. It'd be premature to delete it right now. HOWEVER, Arias herself is not notable outside of the murder of her boyfriend. Did she do it? Dunno. I'm not on the jury and not all of the info is out there at this point in time. It's best to retitle it as "Murder of Travis Alexander" because ultimately that is what the trial is about and that murder is what is notable. It's also be far more neutral than titling it "Trial of Jodi Arias", as that title might be seen as biased for or against her. It also gives her undue weight, as the murder of her boyfriend is what is ultimately the most notable.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:37, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Death of Travis Alexander may be a better title until a conviction. Assisted suicide is still in the realms of human nature, etc.--Canoe1967 (talk) 05:55, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eh... I'm not so sure that it was assisted suicide. He'd been "shot in the face, his throat was slit from ear to ea[r], and he'd been stabbed 27 times". That's not exactly the portrait of assisted suicide, although I have no true issue with it being renamed "Death of Travis Alexander". The only thing is that regardless of whether or not she did it, it looks to have been a murder and I think that's what the police have established it as. (Murder, I mean, not that she specifically did it.) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:45, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comment: I do think that if this is kept right now, it should be revisited/reviewed a month after deletion to see if it's progressed further. It's fairly hot-button right now, with the major networks covering it, enough to where I'd say it should be kept for now. This sort of falls under the other end of the WP:CRYSTAL spectrum where it'd be too hasty to say it won't become this huge "Casey Anthony" or "Amanda Knox" type spectacle.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 07:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I have to differ with that, all reports are about Jodi Arias and her trial she is the main focus. Secondly these actions of Jodi have recieved continued coverage for years so it is not something that has popped out from zero coverage before to 100% coverage now, ofcourse a trial will get extra coverage but the coverage concerns Jodi and her trial so the name should stay as it is. Even if she is found not guilty this will still be the Jodi Arias trial or as I would much rather prefer a name change to Trial of Jodi Arias. It has recieved continued coverage for years so when it comes to coverage this subject has reached notability.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:27, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tokyogirl79, I don't understand how "Jodia Arias trial" or "Trial of Jodi Arias" might be seen as biased for or against her. It's a trial about the murder. I was going to say that I agree that there's no problem using "murder" in the title because that's the way it's been investigated. But Arias and the defense are claiming that she killed Alexander in self-defense, which is another reason why Canoe1967 is wrong to say that there's a possibility that it was assisted suicide. She's admitted that she killed him. Like BabbaQ, I think that "Jodi Arias" and "trial" should say in the heading because that, "Jodi Arias case" and "Jodi Arias murder case" are the WP:COMMON NAMES for the topic. But it won't bother me terribly if the article is titled "Murder of Travis Alexander." Or "Death of Travis Alexander" until, or if, a murder conviction comes about.
As an aside, I changed "27 times" to "29 times" because sources are now saying that he was stabbed 29 times. Because he'd been stabbed so much, intersecting stab wounds included, the medical examiner(s) had missed two stab wounds. For now, I left a note in parentheses that the original report was 27 times. Halo Jerk1 (talk) 21:56, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
And regarding revisiting/revieweing this article after a month for notability, I direct everyone to WP:NOTTEMPORARY (notability is not temporary). Halo Jerk1 (talk) 22:03, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. If we have any doubt as to the notability of the murder, we need to do it the other way round - delete, review and resurrect if needed. Formerip (talk) 22:05, 4 January 2013 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jodi_Arias_trial&oldid=1068866509"