Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patricia P. Pinegar

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 no consensus. Opinion is split between keeping and redirecting; that does not require any admin intervention and hence can be done elsewhere. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Patricia P. Pinegar[edit]

[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)

Non-notable subject that does not meet WP:BASIC. Coverage found in searches for independent, reliable sources is limited to short passing mentions and name checks. The primary sources in the article and found in searches do not serve to establish notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:12, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:12, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:12, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:13, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Peterson and guant's work is a clearly indepdent one that shows notability. Add to that this source [1]. Also she was the general president of the Primary. This is a level of office that clearly without question always passes notability tests.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:19, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~No opinion on the notability of this person, but~~ the additional source is from The Universe (student newspaper), a BYU student paper whose About Us page says "The Daily Universe is committed to the mission of BYU and its sponsoring institution, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints." [2] (signing this later) Bakazaka (talk) 17:34, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would not describe this source listed in the keep !vote directly under the nomination above as a secondary source; it's clearly primary, and primary sources do not serve to establish notability. Wikipedia notability standards and those who the LDS church considers notable is not necessarily always going to be congruent. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:28, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:20, 30 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Article alerts One of the wikiprojects is alerting its members to this AFD. I note that there had been no notification of this on this page. W C M_email 11:51, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As above, Wikipedia:WikiProject_Latter_Day_Saint_movement#Article_alerts also alerts its members to AfDs. I don't see why this is relevant. originalmess^{how u doin that busta rhyme?} 00:18, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They should do IMHO. W C M_email 00:22, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 11:06, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Primary (LDS Church). Search finds no significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources. Church sources (Church News, Ensign, lds.org, etc) are not independent per WP:IIS and therefore not usable for establishing notability. Above !vote to keep only added another non-independent LDS source with a double conflict of interest as a student newspaper covering an alumna. Coverage outside the church seems to be of a different person with the same name in a different US state. Suggest redirecting to Primary (LDS Church), where subject's role in the church is already mentioned. Bakazaka (talk) 17:32, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 20:07, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Regardless of the current state of this article, the subject has notability because of her position; we already have an article (Primary (LDS Church)#Chronology of the general presidency of the Primary) and a succession box on the Presidents of the Primary, so if the article were deleted it would simply need to be recreated. Please also note that searches need to be done on variants of her name, not merely the current article title. Softlavender (talk) 23:23, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – There is no presumed notability for Mormon subjects and leaders on Wikipedia. No guideline or policy provides presumed notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:35, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 10:27, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Primary (LDS Church), as described above. Everything I saw in a search was published by the LDS or BY university. All are therefore primary or close to primary sources. Fails requirement for independent coverage.96.127.244.27 (talk) 19:08, 20 August 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.