Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Strelnikova

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:17, 25 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maria Strelnikova

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

Aside from more specific considerations such as WP:1E (her alleged notability stems from maybe being very old but maybe not, thus the one event I refer to here is "getting really old" not "an individual birthday") and WP:NOTNEWSPAPER, this individual does not seem to meet the general guidelines of WP:N. Setting aside my arguably WP:ORish contention that her age has never been verified by an organization with the credentials to do so (such as Guinness World Records or the GRG), even if she really was 115, there is no Wikipedia policy that grants automatic notability to people of an extreme age, which makes WP:N the relevant policy. Specifically, I do not see any evidence of non-trivial coverage in multiple, independent third-party sources. She seems to have had a brief burst of attention in early 2005 for her age, followed by a stream of Russian-language obituaries after her death two months later and nothing since (that I could uncover), meaning that she lacks the sustained coverage that would distinguish her from thousands of other individuals claiming (falsely or otherwise) to be very old. There's nothing here of encyclopedic merit that could not be (and is not) covered by the longevity claims article. Canadian Paul 17:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - being 115 years old is not a WP:1E situation. It's not an event but a very rare achievement. There are articles with non-trivial coverage about her life (such as living through the Siege of Leningrad etc). —Мандичка^YO 😜 08:31, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:34, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95 ^Talk 10:33, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Longevity claims#Past. Unverified means she isn't worthy of her own article. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:33, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:55, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - being older than someone else is not notable. I am the oldest person sitting in this chair, but that does not suffice. It is even less notable if there is no proof of age.--Rpclod (talk) 03:32, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, the longevity claim is not verified.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:18, 24 July 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.