Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Great Immigrants

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 Carnegie Corporation of New York. Sandstein 11:22, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great Immigrants[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)

Notability concerns; no independent references found. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:29, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:29, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete based on notability concerns. I searched for articles in reliable mainstream publications that have the award as the article topic/focus (i.e., not just a passing mention), and came up with two only: [1][2] There's some stuff on less reliable or non-independent platforms, such as Oprah [3] and various university press releases [4]. Overall, this to me does not seem to rise to a sufficient level of notability. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 17:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Add: Redirect as suggested below would be fine IMO. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 20:07, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Carnegie Corporation of New York, and if better sourcing could be found, you could even incorporate the list there, but not without sourcing.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:51, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This award is given each year to immigrants who have worked very hard to improve America and it's communities socially, financially, ethically, etc. These people, famous and otherwise, have been reported on by their schools, local papers, etc.. but also the New York times. I believe it should be included. If changing it to the Carnegie Corp page is the only answer, then I'm happy with that since those who find it relevant enough to link to it would still be able. Tuuzi (talk) 19:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe keep. The awards appears to get regular coverage in the States News Service but I am having trouble identifying how reliable of a source that is since it lacks an online presence. My university has access to their articles at the Nexis Uni academic research website. If that source is considered reliable and independent this probably is a keep because their is considerable coverage on award winners.4meter4 (talk) 17:26, 14 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 17:13, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:48, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: The US was founded by immigrants. However, the sources provided no not provide proof of notability. The site listed under the Sources section, "List of 2019 Great Immigrant honorees" (I added the year), might work for that year but 2015-2018 is unsourced. There needs to be sources for those years. The "princeton.edu" source is specifically about Angus Deaton and Aleksandar Hemon, and the history.com source is about "Andrew Carnegie".

Delete - Fails WP:GNG. There is no further explanation but just a list of people. Notability and accuracy can be doubted. If this article is allowed to stay, it will lead to future additional of names in which can be doubted. Who will screen the names one by one? Even today, can anyone provide the proof of notability or evidence? Strong delete or redirect to Carnegie Corporation of New York as per recommended by User talk:Onel5969. This article should not have existed on its own. - Jay (talk) 09:04, 30 November 2019 (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.