Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mildred Mottahedeh

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 keep. czar 17:05, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mildred Mottahedeh

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:BASIC Serv181920 (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Serv181920 (talk) 10:35, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:37, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone 10:37, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hints of notability if her work was catalogued, but the article doesn't really give much in that department. Her Bahai faith is neither here nor there. Oaktree b (talk) 21:11, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only 2 sources. Did a google/ news search and found only one more source, but still Non notable. Peter303x (talk) 22:27, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Reading that obituary, one would assume there would be more sources, but I couldn't find any either. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 22:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A full-length obituary in the New York Times plus two volumes of catalogue of her ceramic collection ("one of the world's finest private collections" according to the NYT) is enough. Additionally, in the bibliography, there are multiple further sources some of which look reliable, including a brief mention in an encyclopedia [1], another obituary [2], another mention in a research paper which calls her "a prominent American" [3] and a newspaper article [4]. She retired in 1998, so many sources about her may not be readily accessible online. Espresso Addict (talk) 09:56, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sources do not add up to anything substantial. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC).[reply]
Keep -- In addition to the sources identified by Espresso Addict, newspapers.com reveals several features ([5], [6], [7]). When all the sources are summed up, I think there's certainly enough to meet GNG -- Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, just needing integrating of sources. Smkolins (talk) 21:01, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She appears to be extremely notable, with full length news pieces covering her from around the country across decades. Silver seren^C 21:42, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep An increase in sources, which clearly demonstrate her notability both as a collector, a faith representative and a businesswoman Lajmmoore (talk) 09:31, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Espresso Addict. --Rosiestep (talk) 15:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Now a very obvious Keep, as expanded since the nom. Johnbod (talk) 15:56, 14 December 2020 (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.