Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ophélie Bretnacher: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 13:25, 8 February 2023

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2010 January 6.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Jayjg ^(talk) 02:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ophélie Bretnacher

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

Single event only. Subject is not notable apart from her death, article is a more of a crime report than a biography. Off2riorob (talk) 18:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, BLP1E, NOTNEWS etc ukexpat (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the subject is known for only one event, namely her disappearance. Although the death of a young person is sad, there is no viable reason to have a stand-alone wikipedia article on this individual. Jezebel'sPonyo ^shhh 18:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Subject fails wikipedia notability guidelines. Thousands of people vanish, and turn up dead a year, and nothing seems to mark this one as special. Also WP:NOT#NEWS Martin451 (talk) 18:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per WP:BLP1E. Joe Chill (talk) 20:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. -- Martin451 (talk) 22:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. -- Martin451 (talk) 22:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- Martin451 (talk) 22:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
BLP1E?? Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 01:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There is nothing else to use and being dead doesn't mean an automatic article. Joe Chill (talk) 01:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - If there's nothing else to use (and I'm not agreeing with the specific claim), then you don't have an argument for deletion, because "living" is an essential element of the policy you're citing. I think you should review the range of potentially applicable policies and guidelines more carefully. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - There is WP:BIO1E which I linked to in my delete comment above - it covers all biographies. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^shhh 02:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - Even if there wasn't anything that covered it, which I just found out that there is, it wouldn't matter. That's a dumb response because it's such a minor detail. Joe Chill (talk) 02:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, although a person can be here for one event ( Jon Benet Ramsey, imho no where even close on this article. } this seems to be more of a memorial page then anything else. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do not agree with the deletion.Ophelia Bretnacher It's not a memorial page . The case Ophélie Bretnacher Google: 307 000 Articles Ophelia Bretnacher Photos: 67 700 ... etc.

Actually, I just removed it. The section headers were screwing things up on the log page. Besides, as you just said, it's visible in the page history.
— V = I * R (talk to Ω) 18:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I left a warning about the "ownership" issues seen above. I also tried explaining that the article neded to be cleaned up. It was all over the place and wasn't not NPOV. Kinda confusing how the model was connected other then she went missing too....Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know I am not the owner of this text and I sincerely hope it will be improved. But in this particular case, Hell In A Bucket has mostly withdrawn more than half. why? Improving an article, is not delete it ? ....Why not tell me why you do not mention the important things? Ophélie Bretnacher disappeared at the same time as Eva Rhodes in the same place. Facts are proved and documented, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/08/animal-welfare-woman-feared-murdered

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1162648/David-Miliband-slammed-failing-assist-hunt-animal-loving-60s-model-feared-murdered-Hungary.html

Why did you cut that ? I just wanted to mention " Ophélie bretnacher desappeared in Budapest near at the same time as Eva Rhodes, the model muse of John Lennon and Yoko Ono". I think this facts are important because Political personnalities in France and in United Kingdom ( helped by Yoko Ono) want to have a response of Hungary. Theses two desappearances at the same time and the same place are a real Européan problem. They will have diplomatic consequences. (I have made a synopsis to day because my argumentation was too long ) Raymondnivet (talk) 09:15, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've collapsed the rest of the statement by this user. It is extremely long, and not properly formatted. --King Öomie 19:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Delete, NOTMEMORIAL. It also isn't the PR arm of the French government. It doesn't matter how noble your cause is. You don't get a free pass from WP:N. --King Öomie 19:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- I'd also like to point out that accusations of censorship tend to ring exceptionally hollow with editors here, and in no way help your case. This article does not meet the criteria for inclusion. These criteria MAKE us an encyclopedia- if it's not notable, it's not covered. --King Öomie 19:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The case Bretnacher Ophelia is a state affair Raymondnivet (talk) 01:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Ponyo and Martin. @Kate (parlez) 01:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete NOTMEMORIAL and NOTNEWS. Grsz¹¹ 06:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

307 000 articles on google... Photos: 67 700 ... etc. The case Bretnacher Ophelia pointing the problem of justice and police non cooperation between France and Hungary, violating the Treaty of Lisbon. This is an issue of human rights and democracy in Europe.

Comment- That's an argument for the creation of Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher, not the survival of THIS article. The proceedings would not be significantly different had the man killed some other french woman (though perhaps the coverage would be less pervasive if he'd killed someone less pretty). --King Öomie 13:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, WP:GOOGLETEST. I'm less than surprised to see so many hits relating to the murder of a pretty french girl. --King Öomie 13:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is explained because Ophelie believed the construction of Europe. She was a person of great charisma, she had friends everywhere. As the campaign for the return came from across Europe and elsewhere: Germany, Russia, France, Hungary, Italy etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymondnivet (talk • contribs) 14:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I want to explain something to you as gently as possible. I can't guarantee you won't be offended.

I'm sure she was a good person, and it's terrible that she was killed. But her personality is simply not relevant in this debate. There is no exception in WP:N for people who were 'charismatic'. Her death, in and of itself, is non-notable (which isn't to say that it isn't terrible). The governmental response to the ensuing investigation may be notable- but this DOES NOT allow for the creation of an article about the girl herself, especially if you intend to include a description of her personality, or her political opinions. This article, and indeed the subject itself, is unfit for inclusion in the English Wikipedia. And you seem to be the only person here who disagrees. --King Öomie 15:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For now I agree with King. Let things play out it may end up being owrthy of inclusion after the politics play out. That time is not yet though.....Wiki will still be here when it is. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, and I take it well... It was not an argument, it was only to explain so much reactions in Europe:) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Raymondnivet (talk • contribs) 16:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - sadly, there are lots of white females who die under mysterious circumstances every year, and WP can not have an article on every one of them. Bearian (talk) 17:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The case Bretnacher Ophelie is a state affair. This is an issue of human rights and democracy in Europe Raymondnivet (talk) 17:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But the article isn't about that. It's about her murder. It only mentions the political issue in passing. It spends more time discussing the efforts to find her. --King Öomie 18:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And her murder is non notable. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Small correction: It's a non-notable death. According to the article sources it's being treated as a drowning, but murder has not been ruled out. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^shhh 18:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems a good idea : That's an argument for the creation of Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher, not the survival of THIS article. And you are reposting Kings comment why? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC) Because everybody didn't say ONLY DELATE. Raymondnivet (talk) 10:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say it was a GOOD argument. I only meant to point out that arguing the relevance and importance of the political backlash of her murder didn't help your case in defending an article about her. --King Öomie 14:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

yes I understand ... but I just wanted to say it was an important point of view of socio-political science. Wikipedia isn't an encyclopedia? Political science does not interest it? I would not say it was my opinion. it is just a scientific interest ... and encyclopedic ... --Raymondnivet (talk) 14:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move - to Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher (currently a redirect to this article), per Hell and King. The aftermath of the crime is notable, but the victim herself is not. --Orange Mike | Talk 14:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure how proper it would be to have an article titled Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher when the article has two sources stating " Forensic experts reported that there was no sign of aggression or criminal acts on her body, and concluded that death was probably the result of a suicide or accident" --Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 15:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Indeed, the nature of the crime is itself a source of controversy in this issue, so at this time, 'Murder' isn't an appropriate title. I was making a point when I mentioned it, not a genuine suggestion. They say that no signs of aggression were found, but the article history mentions a large bruise. I have to wonder which one is incorrect. --King Öomie 15:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And tittle : Disappearance of Ophélie Bretnacher ? it would be good ? Raymondnivet (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC) And for the murder: there is a big hematoma .It is actually an homicide. Raymondnivet (talk) 16:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're killing me here. I am unconvinced that the article as it stands is acceptable under ANY title (and the original version isn't better). As to your assertion, she could easily have suffered an impact while falling into the river/jumping/any number of other theories. It's not as conclusive as you make it sound. Your keen interest leads me to believe that you're interested less in the political aspect and more on justice being served. --King Öomie 17:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this viewpoint as stated above. One day this may meet the standards of inclusion at this point that time is not here. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 18:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since the beginning regardless of all the arguments that I gave, you absolutely refuse any inclusion whatsoever for the notability, the encyclopedic value, or the socio-political value. I am certain of is that you refuse all arguments, all even better justified. Regarding the argument of justice, no, it is not mine, so that justice is done, it must go to court. I'm not here for justice ... I'm here for the encyclopedic value ... And I return to my first question: censorship ? I have noticed this as the 4 times I mentioned Eva Rhodes H.I.B. withdrew my sentence in less than a minute! You have instructions on Eva Rhodes who was a John Lennon's friend ? You're afraid that this parasite does John Lennon? Worry, I just want to contribute to the desappearance of Ophelie Bretnacher and its consequences on European democracy, and neither Eva Rhodes, John Lennon does not interest me and I am ready to forget them. Chloemassart (talk) 19:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smelling like a lockerroom. Be it meat or sock can't tell yet. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 19:33, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't Know what you mean, but I understand maybe it's an insult for my wife : Chloé. my wife think that it's censorship. I, Raymond desagree with her. But now, maybe she's right. Insults are autorised on wikipedia ? you are an administrator Hell in a Bucket ? you are autorised to insult users' wifes ? I am waiting for your excuses a soon as possible --Raymondnivet (talk) 19:53, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here on wikipedia what you are doing right now is called either Sockpuppetry or Meatpuppetry. See WP:SOCK Hell In A Bucket (talk) 20:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HiaB, keep in mind that metaphors are typically lost in translation (not to insult, Chloe and Raymond, your english is actually quite good)- I assume you meant "Smells like a locker room" to imply sockpuppetry, rather than to actually insult the user as a person. Though perhaps stick to "Looks like someone opened the sock drawer" in the future :P. Raymond, your anger is reasonable given the circumstances here; I truly believe this is a misunderstanding. --King Öomie 21:51, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good evening, Since 3 days, I made the effort to explain in your language, how it seemed to me that the case of non-compliance of cooperation between 2 member states of Europe, from a student traveler, who will probably drag on for years before coming to your television or your newspaper, when she made headlines a year now of our newspapers in Europe and on the Internet. I thought there was not such a gap between 2 continents, at the internet age. I was sadly disappointed. Your ways and also your comments are not the same as ours. We also, we the people of the old continent's capacity for empathy, I have not always felt (with some exceptions) when you talk of disappearances which seem natural to you. But here I digress from the Encyclopedia ... My wife asked me to stop writing to you and I'll listen. I can add nothing more. I hope you have not tried to insult her. I do not understand your business "meat" and "socks", and I confess that I've had enough. The day you want, you will make yourself this product with your own research. This effort on my part was too time consuming and I have other more important responsibilities. I also hope you do not try to censor us. I'm not sure. I also think you have black listed Eva Rhodes (John Lennon's friend). The connection between Ophélie and Eva was made by the journalists of the Guardian, not me. My wife and me think that it had it's place on wikipedia It's a case of democracy. I salute you. Raymondnivet (talk) 23:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely lost in translarion. I never meant to call your wife any names only refer to a policy we have here. Sorry for the confusion. Wiki isn't a democracy though./...Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HiaB was referring specifically to [1]. On FR, that's an essay- but on EN, it's a policy. --King Öomie 21:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain us why do you have in Wikipedia a so long article on Alicia Ross and on the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann and why you don't accept Ophélie Bretnacher ? --Raymondnivet (talk) 15:08, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After a quick review of the article, they had much more media coverage and seem to have more impact on their collective communities. One day your article might get there, that time is not now. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I think that the discussion ins't closed, and it can maybe change, if other people want to KEEP this article as The Ophélie Bretnacher case ,

Now you have seen it's not a biography, not news, ans it's very important for people of France and Hungary ? We also think that Ophélie Bretnacher should be on the List of people who disappeared mysteriously in 2008. Raymondnivet (talk) 00:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You have made your arguments as to why you think the article should be kept and others have argued otherwise. You are not improving your case by repeating your comments ad nauseam - the admin who reviews the dicussion will read all the comments and make a decision when the 7 day discussion period has passed. – ukexpat (talk) 16:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't understand that an admin will read all the comments and will make a decision. That's why I was repeatind. Excuse me. I's the first time. Best regards Raymondnivet (talk) 20:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

HIAB removed the phrase that has crucial importance, because it's non-compliance with Européan directives and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is the subject of the actual legal action. This will be the next chapter "Good police and judicial cooperation between countries, members of Europe is specified in the Treaty of Lisbon, applicable on 1 December 2009 and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union". So I surrender, because it is not, to return at an early removal requests, or news, or a tribute to a beautiful white female unfortunately drowned.

I stress a lot for the existence of this article in Wikipedia, or what you propose in fine (despite the hundreds of newspaper articles, television, etc.), because in fact only Wikipedia is encyclopedic and does not undergo the influence of the press, or any group whatsoever except clippings HIAB:). So that only items in multiples of press articles sometimes contradictory (eg an article concludes suicide, another homicide) can approach the nearest neutral ... Insofar as we have a Wikipedia entry, we would have the same English, Italian and also German and Hungarian. Because that Ophelia was French, his family lived in Austria, his friends were German, French, Italians, Hungarians, etc. .. and she died in Hungary . Raymondnivet (talk) 21:33, 14 December 2009 (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.

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+<noinclude>{{Delrevafd|date=2010 January 6}}</noinclude>
+<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
+:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]).  No further edits should be made to this page.''
+<!--Template:Afd top
+Note:  If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]].  When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
+The result was    '''delete'''. [[User:Jayjg|Jayjg ]]<sup>[[User_talk:Jayjg|<small style="color:darkgreen;">(talk)</small>]]</sup> 02:21, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 ===[[Ophélie Bretnacher]]===
-{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}
 :{{la|Ophélie Bretnacher}} – <includeonly>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ophélie Bretnacher|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>([[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2009 December 8#{{anchorencode:Ophélie Bretnacher}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/cgi-bin/afdparser?afd=Wikipedia%3AArticles+for+deletion%2F{{urlencode:Ophélie Bretnacher}} AfD statistics])
@@ Line 6: / Line 13: @@
 Single event only. Subject is not notable apart from her death, article is a more of a crime report than a biography. [[User:Off2riorob|Off2riorob]] ([[User talk:Off2riorob|talk]]) 18:32, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * '''Delete''' per nom, BLP1E, NOTNEWS etc [[User:Ukexpat|ukexpat]] ([[User talk:Ukexpat|talk]]) 18:42, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''', the subject is known for only [[WP:BIO1E|one event]], namely her disappearance. Although the death of a young person is [[WP:NOTMEMORIAL|sad]], there is no viable reason to have a stand-alone wikipedia article on this individual. [[User:Ponyo|<b><font color="FFB521">Jezebel's</font></b><font color="3773A5">Ponyo</font>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ponyo|<font color="3773A5">''shhh''</font>]]</sup> 18:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''', the subject is known for only [[WP:BIO1E|one event]], namely her disappearance. Although the death of a young person is [[WP:NOTMEMORIAL|sad]], there is no viable reason to have a stand-alone wikipedia article on this individual. [[User:Ponyo|<b style="color:#FFB521;">Jezebel's</b><span style="color:#3773A5;">Ponyo</span>]][[User_talk:Ponyo|<sup style="color:#3773A5;">''shhh''</sup>]] 18:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' per nom. Subject fails wikipedia notability guidelines. Thousands of people vanish, and turn up dead a year, and nothing seems to mark this one as special. Also [[WP:NOT#NEWS]] [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<font style="color:#FB0">4</font><font style="color:#F00">5</font><font style="color:#F60">1</font>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 18:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' per nom. Subject fails wikipedia notability guidelines. Thousands of people vanish, and turn up dead a year, and nothing seems to mark this one as special. Also [[WP:NOT#NEWS]] [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<span style="color:#FFBB00;">4</span><span style="color:#FF0000;">5</span><span style="color:#FF6600;">1</span>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 18:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''': Per [[WP:BLP1E]]. [[User:Joe Chill|Joe Chill]] ([[User talk:Joe Chill|talk]]) 20:03, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
-*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/France|list of France-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<font style="color:#FB0">4</font><font style="color:#F00">5</font><font style="color:#F60">1</font>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 22:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
+*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/France|list of France-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<span style="color:#FFBB00;">4</span><span style="color:#FF0000;">5</span><span style="color:#FF6600;">1</span>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 22:47, 8 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
-*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hungary|list of Hungary-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<font style="color:#FB0">4</font><font style="color:#F00">5</font><font style="color:#F60">1</font>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 22:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
+*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Hungary|list of Hungary-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<span style="color:#FFBB00;">4</span><span style="color:#FF0000;">5</span><span style="color:#FF6600;">1</span>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 22:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
-*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Law|list of Law-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<font style="color:#FB0">4</font><font style="color:#F00">5</font><font style="color:#F60">1</font>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 22:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
+*<small class="delsort-notice">'''Note''':  This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Law|list of Law-related deletion discussions]]. <!--Template:Delsort--></small> <small>-- [[w:User:Martin451|Martin'''<span style="color:#FFBB00;">4</span><span style="color:#FF0000;">5</span><span style="color:#FF6600;">1</span>''']] ([[w:User talk:Martin451#top|talk]]) 22:49, 8 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
 *B'''''L'''''P1E?? [[User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|Hullaballoo Wolfowitz]] ([[User talk:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|talk]]) 01:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 **There is nothing else to use and being dead doesn't mean an automatic article. [[User:Joe Chill|Joe Chill]] ([[User talk:Joe Chill|talk]]) 01:12, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 ***If there's nothing else to use (and I'm not agreeing with the specific claim), then you don't have an argument for deletion, because "living" is an essential element of the policy you're citing.  I think you should review the range of potentially applicable policies and guidelines more carefully. [[User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|Hullaballoo Wolfowitz]] ([[User talk:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz|talk]]) 02:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
-****There is [[WP:BIO1E]] which I linked to in my delete comment above - it covers all biographies. --[[User:Ponyo|<b><font color="FFB521">Jezebel's</font></b><font color="3773A5">Ponyo</font>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ponyo|<font color="3773A5">''shhh''</font>]]</sup> 02:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
+****There is [[WP:BIO1E]] which I linked to in my delete comment above - it covers all biographies. --[[User:Ponyo|<b style="color:#FFB521;">Jezebel's</b><span style="color:#3773A5;">Ponyo</span>]][[User_talk:Ponyo|<sup style="color:#3773A5;">''shhh''</sup>]] 02:10, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 ****Even if there wasn't anything that covered it, which I just found out that there is, it wouldn't matter. That's a dumb response because it's such a minor detail. [[User:Joe Chill|Joe Chill]] ([[User talk:Joe Chill|talk]]) 02:16, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 :'''Delete''', although a person can be here for one event ( [[Jon Benet Ramsey]], imho no where even close on this article. } this seems to be more of a memorial page then anything else. [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 04:31, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
-I do not agree with the deletion.Ophelia Bretnacher Google: 307 000 Articles Ophelia Bretnacher Photos: 67 700 ... etc.
+I do not agree with the deletion.Ophelia Bretnacher It's not a memorial page . The case Ophélie Bretnacher Google: 307 000 Articles Ophelia Bretnacher Photos: 67 700 ... etc.
 ::Actually, I just removed it. The section headers were screwing things up on the log page. Besides, as you just said, it's visible in the page history.<br/>— [[User:Ohms law|<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.3em 0.3em 0.1em; class=texhtml"><i>V</i> = <i>I</i> * <i>R</i></span>]] ([[User talk:Ohms law|talk to Ω]]) 18:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 :::I left a warning about the "ownership" issues seen above. I also tried explaining that the article neded to be cleaned up. It was all over the place and wasn't not NPOV. Kinda confusing how the model was connected other then she went missing too....[[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 18:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
+I know I am not the owner of this text and I sincerely hope it will be improved. But in this particular case, Hell In A Bucket has mostly withdrawn more than half. why? Improving an article, is not delete it ? ....Why not tell me why you do not mention the important things?
+Ophélie Bretnacher disappeared at the same time as Eva Rhodes in the same place. Facts are proved and documented,
+http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/08/animal-welfare-woman-feared-murdered
+http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1162648/David-Miliband-slammed-failing-assist-hunt-animal-loving-60s-model-feared-murdered-Hungary.html
+Why did you cut that ?
+I just wanted to mention " Ophélie bretnacher desappeared in Budapest near at the same time as Eva Rhodes, the model muse of John Lennon and Yoko Ono".
+I think this facts are important because Political personnalities in France and in United Kingdom ( helped by Yoko Ono) want to have a response of Hungary.
+Theses two desappearances at the same time and the same place are a real Européan problem. They will have diplomatic consequences.
+(I have made a synopsis to day because my argumentation was too long ) [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 09:15, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 ::::I've collapsed the rest of the statement by this user. It is extremely long, and not properly formatted.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 19:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 *Also, '''Delete''', NOTMEMORIAL. It also isn't the PR arm of the French government. It doesn't matter how noble your cause is. You don't get a free pass from [[WP:N]].  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 19:02, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 :*'''Comment'''- I'd also like to point out that accusations of censorship tend to ring exceptionally hollow with editors here, and in no way help your case. This article does not meet the criteria for inclusion. These criteria MAKE us an encyclopedia- if it's not notable, it's not covered.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 19:18, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
-000 articles on google...
-The case Bretnacher Ophelia is a state affair Ophelia Bretnacher Google: 307 000 Articles Ophelia Bretnacher Photos: 67 700 ... etc.
+The case Bretnacher Ophelia is a state affair
 [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 01:07, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 *'''Delete''' per Ponyo and Martin. <small>[[user:Katerenka|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:deeppink">'''@Kate'''</span>]] [[user talk:Katerenka|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:deeppink">'''(parlez)'''</span>]]</small> 01:58, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
-*'''Delete''' NOTMEMORIAL and NOTNEWS. '''[[User:Grsz11|<font color="black">Grsz</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:Grsz11|<b><font color="red">11</font></b>]]</sup>''' 06:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Delete''' NOTMEMORIAL and NOTNEWS. '''[[User:Grsz11|<span style="color:black;">Grsz</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:Grsz11|<b><span style="color:red;">11</span></b>]]</sup>''' 06:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 000 articles on google... Photos: 67 700 ... etc.
-The case Bretnacher Ophelia is a state affair, pointing the problem of justice and police  non cooperation between France and Hungary, violating the Treaty of Lisbon. This  is an issue of human rights and democracy in Europe
+The case Bretnacher Ophelia pointing the problem of justice and police  non cooperation between France and Hungary, violating the Treaty of Lisbon. This  is an issue of human rights and democracy in Europe.
 *'''Comment'''- That's an argument for the creation of [[Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher]], not the survival of THIS article. The proceedings would not be significantly different had the man killed some other french woman (though perhaps the coverage would be less pervasive if he'd killed someone less pretty).  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 13:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 :*Also, [[WP:GOOGLETEST]]. I'm less than surprised to see so many hits relating to the murder of a pretty french girl.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 13:49, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
-This is explained because Ophelie believed the construction of Europe. She was a person of great charisma, very sporty. She had traveled extensively in his studies and she had friends everywhere. As the campaign for the return came from across Europe and elsewhere: Germany, Russia, France, Hungary, Italy etc.  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Raymondnivet|contribs]]) 14:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+This is explained because Ophelie believed the construction of Europe. She was a person of great charisma, she had friends everywhere. As the campaign for the return came from across Europe and elsewhere: Germany, Russia, France, Hungary, Italy etc.  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Raymondnivet|contribs]]) 14:23, 10 December 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 :Okay, I want to explain something to you as gently as possible. I can't guarantee you won't be offended.
 :I'm sure she was a good person, and it's terrible that she was killed. But her personality is simply not relevant in this debate. There is no exception in [[WP:N]] for people who were 'charismatic'. Her death, in and of itself, is non-notable (which isn't to say that it isn't terrible). The governmental response to the ensuing investigation ''may'' be notable- but this DOES NOT allow for the creation of an article about the girl herself, especially if you intend to include a description of her personality, or her political opinions. This article, and indeed the subject itself, is unfit for inclusion in the English Wikipedia. And you seem to be the only person here who disagrees.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 15:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
@@ Line 40: / Line 61: @@
 It was not an argument, it was only to explain so much reactions in Europe:)  <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Raymondnivet|contribs]]) 16:31, 10 December 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
 *'''Delete''' - sadly, there are lots of white females who die under mysterious circumstances every year, and [[WP:NOT|WP can not have an article on every one of them]]. [[User:Bearian|Bearian]] ([[User talk:Bearian|talk]]) 17:04, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
-The case Bretnacher Ophelie is a state affair, pointing the problem of justice and police  non cooperation between France and Hungary, violating the Treaty of Lisbon. This  is an issue of human rights and democracy in Europe
+The case Bretnacher Ophelie is a '''state affair'''. This  is an issue of '''human rights and democracy '''in Europe
-000 articles on google... Photos: 67 700 ... etc.[[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 17:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
+[[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 17:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 :But the article isn't about that. It's about her murder. It only mentions the political issue in passing. It spends more time discussing the efforts to find her.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 18:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 ::And her murder is non notable. [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 18:28, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
-:::Small correction: It's a non-notable ''death''. According to the article sources it's being treated as a drowning, but murder has not been ruled out. --[[User:Ponyo|<b><font color="FFB521">Jezebel's</font></b><font color="3773A5">Ponyo</font>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ponyo|<font color="3773A5">''shhh''</font>]]</sup> 18:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
+:::Small correction: It's a non-notable ''death''. According to the article sources it's being treated as a drowning, but murder has not been ruled out. --[[User:Ponyo|<b style="color:#FFB521;">Jezebel's</b><span style="color:#3773A5;">Ponyo</span>]][[User_talk:Ponyo|<sup style="color:#3773A5;">''shhh''</sup>]] 18:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
 It seems a good idea :
+That's an argument for the creation of Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher, not the survival of THIS article.
-That's an argument for the creation of Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher, not the survival of THIS article. The proceedings would not be significantly different had the man killed some other french woman (though perhaps the coverage would be less pervasive if he'd killed someone less pretty). <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding
 And you are reposting Kings comment why? [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 00:40, 11 December 2009 (UTC)</small>
+Because everybody didn't say ONLY DELATE.
-That's an argument for the creation of Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher, not the survival of THIS article.../...--King Öomie 13:47, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
-Everybody didn't say ONLY DELATE.
 [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 10:41, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 :I didn't say it was a GOOD argument. I only meant to point out that arguing the relevance and importance of the ''political backlash'' of her murder didn't help your case in defending an article about ''her''.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 14:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 yes I understand ...
 but I just wanted to say it was an important point of view of socio-political science.
@@ Line 61: / Line 77: @@
 I would not say it was my opinion. it is  just a scientific interest ... and encyclopedic ...
 --[[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 14:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
-*'''Move''' - to [[Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher]] (currently a redirect to this article), per Hell and King. The aftermath of the crime is notable, but the victim herself is not. --[[User:Orangemike|<font color="darkorange">Orange Mike</font>]]  &#x007C;  [[User talk:Orangemike|<font color="orange">Talk</font>]] 14:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
+*'''Move''' - to [[Murder of Ophélie Bretnacher]] (currently a redirect to this article), per Hell and King. The aftermath of the crime is notable, but the victim herself is not. --[[User:Orangemike|<span style="color:darkorange;">Orange Mike</span>]]  &#x007C;  [[User talk:Orangemike|<span style="color:orange;">Talk</span>]] 14:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
-**I'm not sure how proper it would be to have an article titled ''Murder'' of Ophélie Bretnacher when the article has two sources stating " Forensic experts reported that there was no sign of aggression or criminal acts on her body, and concluded that death was probably the result of a suicide or accident" --[[User:Ponyo|<b><font color="FFB521">Jezebel's</font></b><font color="3773A5">Ponyo</font>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Ponyo|<font color="3773A5">''shhh''</font>]]</sup> 15:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
+**I'm not sure how proper it would be to have an article titled ''Murder'' of Ophélie Bretnacher when the article has two sources stating " Forensic experts reported that there was no sign of aggression or criminal acts on her body, and concluded that death was probably the result of a suicide or accident" --[[User:Ponyo|<b style="color:#FFB521;">Jezebel's</b><span style="color:#3773A5;">Ponyo</span>]][[User_talk:Ponyo|<sup style="color:#3773A5;">''shhh''</sup>]] 15:10, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 ***Indeed, the nature of the crime is itself a source of controversy in this issue, so at this time, 'Murder' isn't an appropriate title. I was making a point when I mentioned it, not a genuine suggestion. They say that no signs of aggression were found, but the article history mentions a large bruise. I have to wonder which one is incorrect. --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 15:22, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
-And tittle : Disappearance of Ophélie Bretnacher ? it would be good ?
+And tittle : '''Disappearance of Ophélie Bretnacher '''? it would be good ?
 [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 16:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
-And for the murder: there is a big  hematoma It is actually an homicide.
+And for the murder: there is a big  hematoma .It is actually an '''homicide'''.
 [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 16:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 :You're killing me here. I am unconvinced that the article as it stands is acceptable under ANY title (and the original version isn't better). As to your assertion, she could easily have suffered an impact while falling into the river/jumping/any number of other theories. It's not as conclusive as you make it sound. Your keen interest leads me to believe that you're interested less in the political aspect and more on justice being served. --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 17:27, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 ::I agree with this viewpoint as stated above. One day this may meet the standards of inclusion at this point that time is not here. [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 18:45, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
 Since the beginning regardless of all the arguments that I gave, you absolutely refuse any inclusion whatsoever for the notability, the encyclopedic value, or the socio-political value.
 I am certain of is that you refuse all arguments, all even better justified.
@@ Line 76: / Line 93: @@
 And I return to my first question: censorship ?
 I have noticed this as the 4 times I mentioned Eva Rhodes H.I.B. withdrew my sentence in less than a minute!
-You have instructions on Eva Rhodes? You're afraid that this parasite does John Lennon?
+You have instructions on Eva Rhodes who was a John Lennon's friend ? You're afraid that this parasite does John Lennon?
-Worry, I just want to contribute to the desappearance of Ophelie Bretnacher and its consequences on European democracy, and neither Eva Rhodes, John Lennon does not interest me and I am ready to forget them.
+Worry, I just want to contribute to '''the desappearance of Ophelie Bretnacher and its consequences on European democracy''', and neither Eva Rhodes, John Lennon does not interest me and I am ready to forget them.
 [[User:Chloemassart|Chloemassart]] ([[User talk:Chloemassart|talk]]) 19:26, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
@@ Line 98: / Line 115: @@
 I hope you have not tried to insult her. I do not understand your business "meat" and "socks", and I confess that I've had enough.
 The day you want, you will make yourself this product with your own research. This effort on my part was too time consuming and I have other more important responsibilities.
-I also hope you do not try to censor us. I'm not sure. I also think you have black listed Eva Rhodes (John Lennon's friend). The connection between Ophélie and Eva was made by the journalists of the Guardian, not me. My wife  and me , don't know anybody of this story ,but we think that it had it's place on wikipedia It's a case of democracy.
+I also hope you do not try to censor us. I'm not sure. I also think you have black listed Eva Rhodes (John Lennon's friend). The connection between Ophélie and Eva was made by the journalists of the Guardian, not me. My wife  and me think that it had it's place on wikipedia It's a case of democracy.
 I salute you.
 [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 23:01, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
@@ Line 105: / Line 121: @@
 :Definitely lost in translarion. I never meant to call your wife any names only refer to a policy we have here. Sorry for the confusion. Wiki isn't a democracy though./...[[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 00:50, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
-We understood MEAT and SOCKS. To close definitively discussion, the connection between Ophelie and Eva Rhodes was made by APA said my wife [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 09:09, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 :HiaB was referring specifically to [http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Faux-nez]. On FR, that's an essay- but on EN, it's a policy.  --[[User talk:Kingoomieiii|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.2em 0.2em 0.1em; class=texhtml">King Öomie</span>]] 21:06, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 Can you explain us why do you have in Wikipedia a so long article on '''[[Alicia Ross]]''' and on the '''[[Disappearance of Madeleine McCann]]'''  and why you don't accept '''[[Ophélie Bretnacher]]''' ?
@@ Line 111: / Line 126: @@
 :After a quick review of the article, they had much more media coverage and seem to have more impact on their collective communities. One day your article might get there, that time is not now. [[User:Hell in a Bucket|Hell In A Bucket]] ([[User talk:Hell in a Bucket|talk]]) 15:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
+Hello,
+I think that the discussion ins't closed, and it can maybe change, if other people want to KEEP this article  as [[ Ophélie Bretnacher |The Ophélie Bretnacher case  ]],
+Now you have seen it's not a biography, not news, ans it's very important for people of France and Hungary ?
+We also think that Ophélie Bretnacher should be on the '''List of people who disappeared mysteriously''' in 2008.  [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 00:57, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
+:You have made your arguments as to why you think the article should be kept and others have argued otherwise. You are not improving your case by repeating your comments ''ad nauseam'' - the admin who reviews the dicussion will read all the comments and make a decision when the 7 day discussion period has passed.&nbsp;–&nbsp;[[User:Ukexpat|ukexpat]] ([[User talk:Ukexpat|talk]]) 16:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
+I didn't understand that an '''admin''' will read all the comments and will make a decision.  That's why I was repeatind. Excuse me. I's the first time.
+Best regards [[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 20:52, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
+HIAB  removed the phrase that has crucial importance, because it's non-compliance with Européan directives and the Charter of Fundamental Rights, which is the subject of the actual legal action. This will be the next chapter "Good police and judicial cooperation between countries, members of Europe is specified in the Treaty of Lisbon, applicable on 1 December 2009 and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union".
+So I surrender, because it is not, to return at an early removal requests, or news, or a tribute to a beautiful white female unfortunately drowned.
+I stress a lot for the existence of this article in Wikipedia, or what you propose in fine (despite the hundreds of newspaper articles, television, etc.), because in fact only Wikipedia is encyclopedic and does not undergo the influence of the press, or any group whatsoever except clippings HIAB:). So that only items in multiples of press articles sometimes contradictory (eg an article concludes suicide, another homicide) can approach the nearest neutral ...
+Insofar as we have a Wikipedia entry, we would have the same English, Italian and also German and Hungarian. Because that Ophelia was French, his family lived in Austria, his friends were German, French, Italians, Hungarians, etc. .. and she died in Hungary .
+[[User:Raymondnivet|Raymondnivet]] ([[User talk:Raymondnivet|talk]]) 21:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
+:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>