Delete, I could possibly see her name in an article about people killed in celebratory gunfire..but it happens a lot. Not notabvle on her own. Williamb 07:13, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Delete. An awful lot of innocent people die in tragic circumstances, but that doesn't make them encyclopaedic. Average Earthman 08:23, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Many people die because of stray bullets. We're not making a page for every victim. Saopaulo1
Abstain for now: A lot of work and information went in here. I hope the contributor visits this page. If so, let me recommend to him or her that a new article on "The Christmas massacre" or something similar be created, if it was a notably bad episode. Geogre 13:30, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I have to say keep, because it seems to have survived VfD once before (check the talk page). — Gwalla | Talk 16:21, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Previous vote was probably a reasonable time ago (~6 mon) making this eligible for reconsideration. Delete unless someone can now show some lasting impact from her story. For example, has it led to a change in a firearms law or practice? Rossami 00:58, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Strong keep. The deletionists lost last time, so they're trying again. There wasn't any reason to delete before, and nothing has changed since. Ambi 09:51, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Wikipedia's not paper. - Nat Krause 14:13, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Delete or move information to some other suitable if one exists on tragic gun accidents and so forth where it might serve as a concrete example. Then Redirect. "Not paper" is not a valid argument for Wikipedia being all-inclusive to the point of attemping to include separate articles for every accidental tragic death in all of human history. The article doesn't indicate how this particular tragic death is more notable and more deserving of an aricle than millions of other accidental tragic deaths. Jallan 14:36, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
[Anon entry left on VfD main page; not clear which vote it was responding to:]
except for the fact that there is nothing of importance in the article. Even the author says its a memorial in the talk section. This isn't a memorial site.
Keep I think the author wrote the article because this young persons death was one which moved all of Puerto Rico. As a consequence of this death, Puerto Rico may enforce tougher gun laws. User:Marine 69-71
So why doesn't he write about puerto Rican gun laws. He might have good intentions but the fact remains that thousands have died of stray bullets. Why should she be singled out? Williamb 07:13, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Not thousands have become famous for it, William....she did.
Keep. The article isnt a memorial. I dedicated it to her and to Shannon and all other stray bullet victims, but that was at the talk page where it is a talk page so anyone can say anything there. Jessica Pacheco Calvente made the headlines of every major newspaper in Puerto Rico. How come no one puts Elizabeth Smart on VFD? While certainly not as famous as Smart, Calvente Pacheco is famous in Puerto Rico and people there (ask my aunts and cousins) still talk about her. Not only that, but Smart was found alive. Pacheco Calvente was the ONLY fatal victim of random gunfire in Puerto Rico the year she died. "Antonio Yo, was up? Martin"
The article on Elizabeth Smart has more than two dozen paragraphs and has six different sections. It's in a different class than this article. - Centrx 19:24, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure Elizabeth Smart was listed here at one point. anthony(see warning) 12:12, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Possibly, but nevertheless my point was that the two articles are not comparable. - Centrx 01:47, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Keep, if only to balance First World bias The Steve 07:42, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
Keep; notable in Puerto Rico is as good as notable anywhere else. Everyking 10:22, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Keep* Someone worked hard on this page. Don't throw that work away. Maybe we don't know who Jessica Pacheco Calvente is, but thats no excuse to delete the page. Maybe someone will read the page and it will make a difference one day. Who knows? I say it isn't harming anyone, so let it be = Neej "Lost my password and too lazy to find it"
That someone "worked hard" on it is no reason to keep an article. - Centrx 02:06, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
