`*Strong oppose -  and  show that the father has consistently been conflicted on whether the victim should actually be named or not. Meanwhile, we have no evidence that the other family members actually support the victim being named; indeed, in the latter link, evidence to the contrary existed.    *Support name is used by international Anglophone media, including BBC and The Telegraph. Wikipedia takes the POV of credible, international Anglophone media, not what individual editors, from their own original research, consider appropriate. The Wikimedia guidelines on contoversial content lay out a principle that ``restrictions to intellectual openness will not as a rule be made when demanded by institutions ... They will be made, when they are, in response to clear and documentable responses by large numbers of individual users, unmoved by ulterior motives, when deemed legitimate under terms and conditions determined by members of the Wikimedia community`` :The documentary India's Daughter mentions that families of rape victims face a culture of shame, and many feel that it's better for rape victims to be killed than have to face social stigma. In my opinion, the goal of Wikipedia is not to pander to that kind of mindset, even if that upsets people in the short term.    :*A combination of IAR, BLP and common decency goes against your viewpoint. A Meta ``study`` from five years ago has no relevance on this Wiki. It is common for, in sensitive cases such as this one where the family object to having the victim named, for that name not to be included. This goes for both Wikipedia and most respectable news media as well (although the latter has been caught out by the contradictory statements by the father).    *Comment - I'm going to wait a few more days before I decide.  In the past it has been my belief that the family had decided that they did not object but I preferred to wait for better evidence.  As for now, I wouldn't make a decision on anything that was said in the past as it is understandable that the parents may have wavered in their decision, and furthermore it can be hard to trust press reports when it comes to any sensational news reporting - after the more recent death of the two girls who supposedly hung themselves there were a least a half a dozen different versions of the incident flying around in the press.  After I watched the documentary (before YouTube deleted it) where I heard/saw the parents clearly say that they wanted her name published I was ready to support WP's use of her name.  But reading the #1 link above, I've decided to wait to see if anything more is published re her name before I decide.     BTW, just to throw it out there, the use of a victim's name remains problematic for the presssee:      `