Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jan Goossenaerts (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. Does not meet Wikipedia's notability requirements. The arguments from the canvassed SPA's are entirely unconvincing. -Scottywong | verbalize _ 17:08, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jan Goossenaerts[edit]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

A year and a half ago, the original AfD was closed no consensus. Since then, there has been some improvement of the article, but sourcing is still remarkably thin, and no one's been able to find anything else, so the original AfD concerns weren't really addressed. I think it's time for a second run through. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:44, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I haven't made my decision on whether or not I support deletion yet, but I would like to point out that this AFD has become the subject of off-wiki canvassing by User:Longevitydude: [1]. The link is members only, but screenshots can be provided if needed. Considering this, I have added the appropriate template to this AFD. Canadian Paul 04:05, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It was obvious that some sort of canvassing had gone on, and that would explain why my search didn't turn anything up. Thanks. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 04:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Although the article provides fascinating and highly-encyclopedic information like "He has reported that his secret to longevity is to work hard and eat two slices of bread with pear syrup every morning", just living a long time does not make one notable. Coverage is trivial, unlikely to improve ever, and there is no salvageable information that is not already present in the list of Belgian supercentenarians, list of European supercentenarians, list of the verified oldest men, and list of supercentenarians who died in 2012 (seems we have some list-clutter in this project, too). --Guillaume2303 (talk) 05:18, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
List clutter issues; you don't say? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 13:32, 2 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 04:27, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but see accompanying disclosure. Fails WP:GNG. I searched ProquestNewsStand and Gale-Cenage/Infotrac proprietary databases, in addition to the web, and found no additional sources. I also agree with Guillaume's assessment that there's nothing of value in the article that isn't already present in the multiple "lists of". Fair disclosure: I was asked to look at this AfD by its nominator, in entirely neutral language, along with one other he'd brought. On the other, I !voted to "keep", in opposition to his nomination. – OhioStandard (talk) 17:44, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete [ditto above disclosure] This article weaves minutiae (eat bread, year entered home, ages of children) around one basic fact -- he lived to age X. Membership in a list or lists handles adequately that which is worth including. EEng (talk) 23:00, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep hes a supercentenarian, and hes been the oldest man in the country for years, and if thats your reason for this afd, then youll have to make a lot more, because a lot of people have articles for being the oldest person/man in a country. Not to mention he was the oldest verified man in the continent of Europe. Longevitydude (talk) 02:09, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS EEng (talk) 05:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here are a few articles about his death:

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=BLMTI_20120322_001::http://www.dhnet.be/infos/belgique/article/389492/le-plus-vieux-belge-est-mort-a-111-ans.html

Longevitydude (talk) 02:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with EEng: this project is in dire need of a huge "spring cleaning". --Guillaume2303 (talk) 08:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I suggest 'keep', based on the feeling I have that Wikipedia seeks to gain information - real information and facts, certainly - rather than delete on some ground of 'insignificance'. Do we delete Neville Chamberlain - as an unsucessful Prime Minister; or Al Gore - as a failed presidential candidate and sometime film-maker?

From this, you will see that I prefer (on the whole) to keep articles. Yes, as my default option. This added by Autochthony 109.154.12.51 (talk) 19:26, 7 May 2012 (UTC) at about 1925 Z on 7 May 2012. — 109.154.12.51 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

I'm trying, and failing, to make any sense of your comment. Would you perhaps be able to clarify for us? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:37, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here, Blade, let me summarize the logic in play here: Proton is to Neville Chamberlain as Al Gore is to (choose): (a) Pear syrup; (b) Analogy; (c) Being; (d) Nothingness. Does that make it clear? EEng (talk) 00:38, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well my choice for the above is b, so if that's right then I guess a little. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 02:00, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please see me after school for additional tuturing, Mr. Blade, as you obviously have not been paying attention. The correct answer is θ, because that is the difference between a duck and ice cream has no bones. EEng (talk) 03:32, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very strong keep: as per Longevitydude. 62.235.158.112 (talk) 22:18, 7 May 2012 (UTC) — 62.235.158.112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Vert strong keep as per above. He was the verified oldest man in Europe (as distinct from the unverified oldest man Józef Kowalski, of Poland.) An obvious keep, unless you want to delete the highest mountain in Europe, Mount Elbrus, or the highest mountain in Western Europe, Mount Blanc. Mind you, Wikipedia ceased being a genuine encyclopaedia some time back when it became a political football game for people with ego problems.Cam46136 (talk) 03:50, 8 May 2012 (UTC)cam46136[reply]
Delete Yes, he was the oldest verified man in Europe - which is why he's on other lists here. That is not sufficient to allow a stand-alone article. I note that the "keeps" are either obviously canvassed from the Yahoo group, or those who always say "keep" at these kinds of AfDs. Perhaps the Yahoo group should start their own Wiki? Then they could have anyone they want on there. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 04:16, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I think there are larger issues here than whether this article is deleted, merged, or kept.

Issue 1 is "can extreme old age confer notability?" As we have seen with Jeanne Calment, the answer is yes.

Issue 2 is "how old does someone have to be, then, to be notable"? A reasonable dividing line is to use coverage in multiple, independent sources outside the local area. If there's a 110th birthday party in a small-town news article, that's not enough. If, however, we have worldwide coverage of a death, such as with Leila Denmark, that's enough.

Issue 3 is the "one-event" test. If all we have is an obituary, nothing more, that may be considered "one event".

If, however, there is substantial continuing coverage over time (as with Jeanne Calment...her international coverage began in 1988 and lasted nine years while alive, and continued after death), then we do not have a "one event" scenario.

Issue 4 is whether Wikipedia is covering these cases fairly and in proper proportion. I agree that some people make it too easy to just create an article when they feel like it. On the other hand, pro-deletionists will delete just about anything, even if it should be kept. It would be better to work on policies for consistency, rather than continually cite the worst Wikipedia guideline of all: "Other Crap Exists". Because what that means is that Wikipedia is not really an encyclopedia, it's a place for cliques to store information that they think is important, and a place where online "wars" happen as groups fight for turf. When one considers how low the standard is for including a sports figure (played ONE game, ever, in a single "major" league=automatic notability for ALL TIME), we have a problem.

Using the sports analogy, someone like Jeanne Calment is the Greatest of All Time, someone like the world's oldest person is like the world champion, someone like Jan Goosenaerts is a "good player". Yet do we delete articles on sports figures who are less than the MVP? No, we don't. And that ultimately comes to a problem of valuation, a society that overvalues sports and the young.69.15.219.71 (talk) 15:07, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 2. Ultimately, coverage in multiple, independent outside sources should determine "notability," not whether someone "likes" or "dislikes" an article or even the coverage in it. Both sides have engaged in erroneous arguments, focusing not on whether there is coverage but whether they like or dislike the article.69.15.219.71 (talk) 15:17, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

To the last part of your first comment, I'm going to quote someone who wrote about "the treatment of longevity qua contest, complete with title-holders, record-breakers, incumbents and all of the language associated with competition, as if old folks are pitted against one another in a tournament whose crowning "achievement" is staving off death longer than one another." Athletes and supercentenarians aren't really congruous at all because people don't compete to see who can live the longest (well, except for Jefferson and Adams, I suppose, but that was a long time ago). Whether that's a larger issue in society is beyond the purview of this AfD. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 15:38, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You may wish to read this article here:

http://rapidcityjournal.com/news/rapid-city-s-oldest-resident-dies-at/article_7566695a-9286-11e1-98d7-0019bb2963f4.html

Quarnberg was the second-oldest person in South Dakota at the time of her death, according to the records of the state Century Club, maintained by the South Dakota Health Care Association.

The oldest person is Beryl Kapaun, 113, who lives at the Golden Living Center in Salem. Kapaun was born June 4, 1899.

With Quarnberg’s death, it is unclear who the second-oldest person in the state is now. The Journal determined that many of the oldest people on the Century Club’s list have died.

Daughter Jane Nieland said her mother was competitive and would have been disappointed to know she never earned the title of the oldest person in the state.

True, it's not a formally organized "competition." However, it should be clear from media coverage for centuries that, sometimes, people become famous due to age, even if the age claim is false (i.e., Thomas Parr). So the issue here is whether Mr. Goossenaerts achieved significant, notable coverage in outside sources, or not.69.15.219.71 (talk) 15:45, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree with your point 1 if you phrase it like "old age may lead someone to become notable". Such as, indeed, Jeanne Calment. Her extreme old age generated a lot of nontrivial coverage and that is what made her notable, not the bare fact of her age. So far, the only coverage of Goossenaerts is trivial, hence he is not notable. Your analogy with sports figures is incorrect: there is generally nontrivial coverage about even minor sports figures (not surprising, given all the sports sections in newspapers, newspapers and magazines dedicated to sports, sports programs on TV, etc. etc. In fact, nowhere on WP does anything become notable just for a single fact, but only if that fact has generated nontrivial coverage in reliable sources. True, we sometimes take shortcuts, because we know from experience that, for example, there will be sources on someone who has won a Nobel Prize, or about a certain lake somewhere, or, indeed, some sports figure. Yet, even those articles can and do get deleted if unexpectedly no sources would be around. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 15:54, 8 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Was Jan Goossenaerts notable?

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/957/Belgie/article/detail/1412456/2012/03/22/Oudste-mannelijke-Belg-111-is-overleden.dhtml

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=BLMTI_20120322_001

http://enmemoire.sudinfo.be/personnalite/jan-goossenaerts-83494#a

http://www.seniorennet.be/Pages/Nieuws/videonieuws.php?id=PIt_51530_vtm_id

http://www.lanouvellegazette.be/actualite/societe/2009-10-31/doyen-belges-109-descend-encore-escaliers-737237.shtml

http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/10/31/30699874.html

http://www.rtl.be/info/belgique/societe/748988/a-110-ans-ce-belge-est-l-homme-le-plus-vieux-d-europe

http://www.sudinfo.be/actualite/belgique/2010-10-29/l-homme-le-plus-age-d-europe-est-belge-820476.shtml

http://www.standaard.be/artikel/detail.aspx?artikelid=0E31HAFQ

http://www.hln.be/hln/nl/957/Belgie/article/detail/1341400/2011/10/30/Jan-Goossenaerts-111-uit-Essen-oudste-man-van-Europa.dhtml

http://www.nieuwsblad.be/article/detail.aspx?articleid=DMF20120322_036

http://www.rtl.be/info/belgique/societe/748988/a-110-ans-ce-belge-est-l-homme-le-plus-vieux-d-europe

http://www.sudinfo.be/actualite/belgique/2010-10-29/l-homme-le-plus-age-d-europe-est-belge-820476.shtml

Was Jan Goossenaerts notable? What do you think? Cam46136 (talk) 18:26, 8 May 2012 (UTC)cam46136[reply]

Alle super-cs er bemerkelsesverdig — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.13.197.103 (talk) 18:59, 8 May 2012 (UTC) — 92.13.197.103 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. User was also blocked 31 hours for vandalism elsewhere.[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.