Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryann Thompson

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2023 February 25.
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. ansh 666 02:27, 16 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maryann Thompson[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. None of the references that I could access provided the in-depth independent coverage that we expect of a notable subject of a biography. The references provided are to projects that Thompson's firm architected. The article purports to be about Thompson, not the firm she founded. The article is laden with promotional fluff and uncited claims. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:21, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 14:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 14:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 14:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 14:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Happy2018! (distænt write) 14:07, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No indication of notability. Billhpike (talk) 03:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Have edited the article to reduce the level of puffery, but what remains still fails the general notability guideline, as most of the references are passing mentions, in press release style or about the firm and not the individual. It also also fails all of the specific notability guideline for architects:

(a) there is no evidence that Ms Thompson is widely cited by peers or successors;

(b) they are not known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique,

(c) they are not the primary subject of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series); and

(d) their work is not (a) a significant monument, (b) a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) won significant critical attention, or (d) represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. -- Euryalus (talk) 06:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree with Euryalus' excellent analysis of this article. I did the same when dealing with this on copyright issues, and came to the same conclusion. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:26, 16 January 2018 (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.