Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Jennings (2nd nomination)

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. Sandstein 12:50, 20 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Jennings[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)

One of far too many stubs on non-notable oldsters that GRG editors dumped on Wikipedia years ago. There's almost no information on the subject herself (it seems largely by her own choice), and all of the coverage is laughably routine. Simply happening to sing O Death convincingly enough to keep having him spare her over for another year, even if she did so for long enough to become the oldest person in an arbitrarily defined geographical area, does not itself confer notability enough for a Wikipedia article. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 01:48, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:53, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:53, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO1E because there is only WP:ROUTINE coverage of her that fails to demonstrate notability and there is no notability guideline that "the oldest x" is notable. The content of the article is pretty much just trivia on how she relates to other peoples longevity milestones or longevity milestones for various jurisdictions. There is almost nothing actually said about her in an article that is supposed to be about her, and ironically, one of the only things said about her is that she disliked being in a different encyclopedia. Her age, life dates, and nationality are already recorded on four different lists, where they are easier to view, so this article is not needed. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:06, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:43, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and/or Redirect to appropriate list per WP:NOPAGE and WP:PERMASTUB. Nothing in this article that isn't easily handled in a list somewhere. Other than fluffy longevity trivia about her various positions on lists she was born, worked as a teacher, never had kids and then died. There is never going to be more than those 4 life details to say about her so better off on a list. CommanderLinx (talk) 06:10, 14 October 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.