Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pamela Fish

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 Snow delete speedily executed to to obvious WP:BLP concerns. Guy (Help!) 22:29, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Pamela Fish

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

Apparent WP:ATTACK bio that fails WP:BLP1E.- Mr X 13:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC) - Mr X 13:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This is a textbook attack page, giving an entirely one-sided view of its topic. No attempt at presenting a WP:NPOV Neiltonks (talk) 13:52, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Seems just to focus on a handful of negative aspects. Her career cannot just consist of a couple of cases that went wrong. (In one of which the outcome was only changed after developments in DNA testing). But even if the rest of her work is exemplary, still may well not pass notability. Unless it can be expanded with more context & demonstrate greater notability, should not be retained as it stands. Eagleash (talk) 13:55, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Mr. X's comments and rationale above. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 14:09, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Person is only the subject of some very scant and mostly local sources for screwing up test results in criminal cases, has done nothing else to garner attention and remains a low-profile individual. Straight-up WP:BLP1E. Tarc (talk) 14:23, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ukexpat (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the editor who first raised the concern. The Chicago Tribune is usually very reliable, and there doesn't seem to be a reliably-published "other side of the story", but BLP1E suggests the only appropriate topic would be Pamela Fish controversy or something, and coverage clearly doesn't support that. FourViolas (talk) 15:03, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This could perhaps be merged into a more neutral Chicago Police Department crime lab article, but certainly does not belong here as a standalone biographical article, as it obviously fails BLP1E, but does meet the standard for a deletable attack article. -- The Anome (talk) 15:39, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:ATTACK. (I'm OK with Snow delete, too, but immediacy isn't really an issue since this has been around for nine years.) Appropriately sourced and weighted material that touches on the subject could be included Murder of Lori Roscetti which likely passes WP:EVENT (see, for example, this website and GBooks). - Location (talk) 17:04, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability is questionable as well (not sure this article is truly attacking her). Paris1127 (talk) 19:49, 10 September 2015 (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.