Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sister Ernestine Declercq

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 redirect to Simba Rebellion#Hostages. There are a range of options given in the discussion for this article; the bulk are for deletion, the next largest group are for merging or redirecting, some for either merging or keeping, and limited support for outright keeping. As a merge has already been done of the pertinent and sourced points, and the consensus inclining toward deletion, but with enough support for redirecting/merging, deleting the article, but using the title as a redirect toward Simba Rebellion#Hostages seems the most appropriate outcome. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 23:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Ernestine Declercq[edit]

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

The subject of this article does not seem to meet WP:GNG. She was a hostage with many other missionaries, but there seems to be no coverage of her that makes her notable. This article seems more like something for a family history, not an encyclopedia. EricSerge (talk) 13:45, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 14:11, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ While Sister Declercq appears to have been an admirable person, she does not appear to meet our notability guidelines at least in English language sources. Her main claim to notability would appear to be her negotiating with the rebels at Uvira but unfortunately that is sourced only to her eulogy. In an attempt to look for more possible dutch and french language sources, I looked to see if she had a page at dutch wikipedia or french wikipedia, which she does not appear to. Someone with more facility in dutch and/or french than me could perhaps do a better search of other language sources if he or she were so inclined. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 15:24, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Per Peterkingiron's comments below: Merge the Missionary Hostages section of the article to Simba Rebellion between the "Early fighting" and "Late fighting" sections. Editors can expand and edit appropriately. The rest I still believe should be deleted. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 20:54, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Usable content merged into Simba Rebellion article [1]. EricSerge (talk) 19:48, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:02, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I've been unable to find anything that supports WP:BIO. Wikipedia is WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - poorly sourced, with citations to MySpace, blogs, and Wikis. Bearian (talk) 20:29, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Either keep or merge into an article on missionaries in the Congo crisis. A significnat number of Christian missionaries, both Catholic and Protestant, were seized and hled prisoner by the Simba insurgents. Many were rescued by a UN (or mercenary troops) within a few months, but they missed a few who remained captoves for some years. There ought to be an article on this. If we do not, this one should nbe kept until we do. Of itself, I suspect that her ministry was not very notable, so that I would prefer to redirect, if there was an appropriate target. Peterkingiron (talk) 16:41, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 23:49, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/merge - WP:DIDEROT Jim-Siduri (talk) 04:47, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep'. I've seen far less detailed and interesting articles on males kept and if I was a deletionist I'd spend a few hours a day getting rid of them; but I'm not. The Hostage at Uvira in Congo section is certainly of note. Maybe they'll try to make her a saint some day. It would be silly if we had to rewrite the article. Put a "needs more refs" tags on it so those who want to ref it can. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 16:25, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Dismissing this nomination by calling me names is neither assuming good faith nor constructive to the conversation. What did I miss? I looked for sources, in English and French, and found none. Find a reliable source to verify the good Sister's participation in the Uvira hostage crisis. I tried and failed, but saying other stuff didn't get deleted does nothing to preserve this article. By the way, if you see articles that do not meet our notability criteria and don't want to nominate them, let me know, I will dig around for better refs and then delete them if none are found. Cheers. EricSerge (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I said "if I was a deletionist" not "if I was Eric Serge." Don't read to much into comments. Carolmooredc (Talkie-Talkie) 01:43, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per above comments. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 17:48, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep'. An interesting addition to women's history. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would agree to it being interesting and a noteworthy addition if it were sourced to our standards, but it is not. The Sister does not seem to rise to our level of notability with quality reliable sources. Her page is part of a since deleted web of Declercq genealogy type articles. EricSerge (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm the one who wrote the original "delete" response above, since modified to "merge", and while I still think that that is the correct answer under our byzantine guidelines, I do also believe that there is systemic bias in those guidelines (and many people of good faith trying to interpret and follow them fairly and, to be sure, some who are not). I agree with The Vintage Feminist that this article is an interesting addition to history. I particularly enjoy studying the history of over-looked and marginalized peoples and our notability guidelines make it difficult to add such stories and help perpetuate the marginalization. I can't speak to the motivation of the nominator, and I assume good faith not just because of policy but because I, myself, chose to look at this article because I hoped to save it. That's what I like to do; find good references for obscure or overlooked topics. I spent a lot of time and I was unable to find an RS that even demonstrates that Sister Declerq (herself, as opposed to a group of religious) was at Uvira and I couldn't. (Which doesn't mean tthere isn't something I missed.) And I fully believe that she was there and that she did negotiate with the rebels and nobody ever bothered to write about this incredible thing she did partly because she was just a nun (more systemic bias). I have no good idea about what to do about what I'll call "historical reference bias" except maybe suggest that we need to have some sort of notability leeway for marginalized people and subjects. Personally, I wouldn't mind if we repealed WP:NOTMEMORIAL and just put refimprove tags, as needed, on any biography where we can verify that the person existed. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 21:26, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Merely existing does not meet the community's notability standards. Most Catholic organizations keep meticulous records. I will WP:AGF on the Sister being there, but there is no verifiable reliable source out there that supports her inclusion in the encyclopedia. I merged the content that was of historical value into the Simba Rebellion article, but at this time, there is nothing more that seems to be salvageable as you admitted after your fruitless search for sources (which I also conducted). Unfortunately, this appears to be a more interesting than average genealogy article. EricSerge (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:SINGLEEVENT. No notability beyond being hostage. Nothing to merge beyond listing: she was not spectacular during being hostage either. Staszek Lem (talk) 04:16, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete lacks significant independent coverage of biographee in reliable publications, in fact she is not even mentioned in many of the sources, e.g. FN8 through FN12. At best was a minor participant in one event. --Bejnar (talk) 22:24, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Simba Rebellion#Hostages. It's a sad truism that women like Declercq often don't get as much in the way of reliable sourcing, but we can only work with what we're given inside the framework of WP:V. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 01:39, 9 August 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete, does not meet GNG. It might be appropriate for her story to be covered in another article as others have suggested, but I don't think that that could be done by merging from this article, the referencing is just too poor. The first three are respectively to Myspace, Commons, and Dutch Wikipedia, all unacceptable sources. The fourth fails verification and is not even about the subject, it is only referencing a fact about Judith Declerqc, but even in this it fails. She is only mentioned in passing and the referenced fact is not in the source. So it goes on, the majority of the sources do not even mention the subject. The primary source for the article appears to be the subject's funeral eulogy (it is offline, if it was printed at all, so I cannot check, but if it is not the primary source then the article is essentially unreferenced). In any case, I am not sure that funeral eulogies can be considered reliable, and they certainly don't count towards notability unless it was published by a reliable publisher. SpinningSpark 02:16, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Simba Rebellion#Hostages. After two weeks of listing we just don't have significant coverage in reliable sources. Nowhere near it, in fact. The article cannot be kept. I suggest a redirect instead of a merge. The article is overly eulogistic and I don't think its text will contribute substantially to the target article. But keep the history behind the redirect in case there's anything, even just sourcing, that might be useful. --Mkativerata (talk) 21:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
'Redirect to Simba_Rebellion#Hostages. All usable content has already been merged to that article. Frmorrison (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2014 (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.