Unidentified Wiki

Here on the Unidentified Wiki, we value the extensive contributions by our variety of diverse editors. Here, members of the site can nominate a case close to them for "featured" status, which indicates the importance of the article's subject to our website.

See our current list of featured cases here.

For featured case nominations related to missing persons, please see featured case nominations on the International Missing Persons Wiki

Definition of a "Featured Case"

A featured case can have two major reasons for nomination. The first is for its popularity in the media or legacy it left. Its importance to bringing change in the field of science and technology, or perhaps the length of time it may have taken to solve supports the reasons for consideration.

A second factor is the content of the article. A case may not be as well known to the public, yet the quality of writing and the amount of work put into the page is worth recognizing.

Cases with a featured status will have a star symbol next to their name in the infobox portion of their entry.


For those participating in the nomination process or the discussion following, some steps must be taken.

  • To nominate a case, add a new section to this page detailing the case title (with a link), giving a short description, and why it was nominated.
  • Users are to respond with "support," "neutral," or "oppose" in bold, followed by their reason for such a decision.
    • In order to be selected, a case must have at least three "support" votes.
      • The votes supporting the nomination must outnumber the opposition votes.
      • At least one administrator is required to voice support for a nomination to be selected.
  • All comments must be civil and appropriate. Failure to do so may result in a temporary block.
  • Decisions should be made by means other than emotional; as we need to avoid a bias of this type.
  • Cases that have issues with formatting, copy and pasting from other sources, or otherwise very short are ineligible for nomination until such concerns are adjusted.
  • Please link to your user page (ex: [[User:Example|Example]]) at the end of your comment to identify yourself as the voter.


Gloucester County Jane Doe (1990)

Gloucester County Jane Doe (February 1990) was a young woman or teen whose partial skeletal remains were discovered behind a supermarket in Deptford, New Jersey. The cause of JD's death is believed to by ligature strangulation. I have worked a lot on this article, researching extensively on what little info I could find on the case, and even taking my own photograph of the building she was found behind. I think that this relatively unknown case would make for a great featured article. (Nominated by Blackholesun1)

  • Oppose: I'm a little hesitant on this one since there isn't a whole lot available on her case history. There also don't seem to be a lot of news articles on her case, and NCMEC removed her from their site (although she's listed on their case map). I'm hoping that implies that they'll eventually add her back, with an updated reconstruction, which would probably bring more attention to her case. - Gourami Watcher
  • Neutral - Unfortunately, there just isn't much information out there about her case. If NCMEC add her back with another reconstruction and more updated information, I'm willing to change my vote to Support. - Hoshiiiii
  • Neutral- Like the others, I'm a bit hesitant. It's a shame that her case has a lack of information right now, but I'm willing to support whenever NCMEC updates her reconstruction and details. If that happens, that should give some more information and coverage to increase information and eyes on the case. - Baipopaibo

Anita Piteau

Anita Piteau was a young woman who was murdered in 1968, and would not be identified until 2020. I feel like her case is significant because it is a well known one in the community. (Nominated by EnterTheLizard)

  • Support Considering she was a fairly well-known case with a lot of intrigue and interest prior to her identification, I believe she should be nominated. - Hoshiiiii
  • Support: I'm in agreement with a nomination due to how well-known her case is, especially now that it is considered solved despite the less-than-ideal conclusion that her killer had died years ago before he could be prosecuted. I recall how much interest was in her case prior to her identification as well, and think this is a great suggestion. - Baipopaibo

Mary Anderson

Mary Anderson was a woman who committed suicide in a hotel room in Seattle, Washington in 1996. Her case is well-known in online circles due to the nature of her death and the lengths she went to to hide her identity. Due to the mysterious nature of her identity and the circumstances around her death, I believe she should be featured. - (Nominated by Hoshiiiii)

  • Support: Her case is quite captivating and well-known at that. With the development in May 2021 that her case is currently in identification work, I think it's worthwhile to feature her case. - Baipopaibo
  • Support: This is a particularly noteworthy case because of the circumstances behind this woman's death and the extent she went to in order to conceal her identity. Beyond using a pseudonym, she demonstrated a confused (deliberately or otherwise) knowledge of New York City, and also brought a rather voluminous amount of luggage with her, more than one would think necessary if a person's intent is to go to a hotel specifically to commit suicide. Beyond the widespread knowledge that already exists about this case, the fact that it is currently under active investigation which may lead to identification warrants promotion to featured status. - Ericdn627

Tempe Girl

Tempe Girl was a teenager who died from a cocaine overdose in Tempe, Arizona in 2002. Her case is well-known in the UID community and she even has her own Wikipedia page. There is a lot of intrigue and mystery surrounding her case, especially the circumstances leading up to her death as she was seen alive and had been a hitchhiker. I believe she should be featured due to the circumstances of her case, in addition to the popularity of it. - (Nominated by Hoshiiiii)

  • Support: With the 20th anniversary of her case happening next year alongside her popularity, I believe it would be a good idea to feature her case. The circumstances leading up to her discovery certainly are mysterious, as well as the note by the girl herself that her family had disowned her for her drug use. It brings a lot of questions about her case to mind, and certainly deserves the nomination. - Baipopaibo
  • Oppose: It is difficult to not feel something for this young woman and the circumstances in which she died, especially since the drug that killed her was literally a last-minute decision she made that she easily might not have made but for… only she knows. One can only imagine what went on in that car between the time she entered and the undoubted panic that ensued as she began to die that resulted in her being disposed of behind a shopping center. That said, emotion alone can not determine whether an article deserves featured status. It is known that her family disowned her; therefore, it seems likely that she wouldn't have been reported missing no matter how much time had passed since her last contact with her relatives. Considering her age, it's not unreasonable to expect she would have put at least some distance between herself and any of her acquaintances at the time she was disowned. In other words, who would be missing her enough to report her absence? Perhaps sheer curiosity held by someone she once knew many years ago would prompt one of her acquaintances to search pages such as this one to try to find answers, but I don't see anything in her case that particularly noteworthy other than sheer emotion that would justify making this case featured. - Ericdn627


Smurfette was a young girl whose decomposed remains were found near a private driveway to an oil field in Houston, Texas, in 2012. Her case is quite well-known in the UID community alongside her recognizable Smurfette shirt that gave her such a namesake. Her case is mysterious, with investigators even considering theories of human trafficking or family in Mexico. With the 10th anniversary of her case happening next year and Identifinders working on it as well, I believe she should be featured. - (Nominated by Baipopaibo)

  • Support: A well-known case in the UID community with many interesting theories. I feel like she's one of the better known UID cases that isn't featured. She also has an article of clothing (her Smurf shirt) that instantly reminds people of her case. Her article on our Wiki is also fairly extensive and detailed. I think she fits both of the criteria and therefore should be nominated - Hoshiiiii

Philadelphia Jane Doe (1972)

Philadelphia Jane Doe (1972) was a woman who was found murdered in an abandoned address in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. This case is still relatively unknown; I only found out about it while browsing updated cases on NamUs to update/add to the wiki. However, the possible institutionalization history and possible lobotomy really stood out to me. By 1972, lobotomies were largely abandoned, but it's very possible she had been lobotomized during the 1950's or 1960's if this detail was accurate. This case is quite sad and I could see it starting to pick-up in attention in the coming years, her being a featured case I feel could kickstart that. - (Nominated by SergeIvanov13)

  • Oppose: There doesn't seem to be a lot of information out there about this case and her article isn't very detailed. I would be willing to change my vote at a later date if more information came out and her article was expanded upon. But as it stands currently, this article doesn't meet any of the criteria for a featured case, which is: popularity or legacy, or the content of the article. I don't think a case being objectively interesting is a reason for it to be featured, otherwise most cases documented here would be eligble for nomination at some stage. Have a look at the page for Daviess County John Doe (1990), whose case was featured based on the content of the article. It might give you some ideas for how to expand the article and get it nominated based on the second criteria - Hoshiiiii
  • Oppose: While the possibility of a lobotomy (and I stress possibility) adds a remarkable and almost uniquely identifying aspect to this woman's identity, as lobotomies in the United States at this time were already quite rare, that by itself can not justify promotion of this case to featured status. Too little information is currently readily available about her case. If she were indeed institutionalized, she may have lost contact with family or friends some time before she was murdered, meaning there's a fair chance no one considered her missing. Marking this case as featured would likely provide no benefit towards identification with the little information that is available. Edit: NamUS goes into more detail than the page here, and it indicates the lobotomy may have been upwards of 20 years antemortem. Lobotomies were more common in the early 1950s than late 1960s–early 1970s, though my rationale remains: this fact alone is not likely to be a major identifying factor for an institutionalized person who, for all we know, may have had no contact with anyone who would consider her missing as a result of her death. - Ericdn627

Rock County John Doe (1995)

Rock County John Doe (1995) is a young man that is suspected to have died accidentally on the bank of Turtle Creek, in Clinton, Wisconsin. He has become well known, especially now that the DNA Doe Project have said they have made a tentative identification. He was also allegedly seen alive before he could have potentially passed away. His entire outfit and some of his belongings were found with him, including a homemade pendant which originated from the nearby town of Janesville. It really stands out to me that despite most likely living near where he was found, nobody has recognized him in the 26 years he's remained unidentified, and I think he would make a great featured case. - (Nominated By Locke420)

  • Neutral - This case is indeed an interesting one, especially with the pendant originating from a close town. It's very fortunate he was seemingly identified by the DNA Doe Project though that identification has yet to be confirmed by law enforcement. Though, I'm hesitant as I feel the case may become more detailed once his identification is confirmed and lends more information on what may have happened and why no one recognized him. Right now, I feel some info may be lacking but this is indeed a case with details that aren't as immense as others. - Baipopaibo

Archived discussions