Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karen Jackman Ashton

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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. czar 19:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Jackman Ashton[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 "philanthropist" and "storyteller". The sources are too weak to show she meets notability requirements. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:17, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:17, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions. Dom from Paris (talk) 15:17, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have to say that there is no reason to put philanthropist in scare quotes. That said, being on a university board is not a defact sign of notability. Even when it is the state-wide elected boards we have for 3 univerisities in Michigan, even more so for that of UVU which is an ascended community college. True, it is without question a university today, I am less sure about its status when Ashton was on the board. As a BYU alumni I would love to demonstrate that Ashton is notable, but I am psotive she is not. She probably had a defining role in her husband's business success, but Wikipedia is built on sources, so unless you can source that, nothing is there. Her endevors have not risen to the level of notability. Positions like a university art museum board clearly do not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:53, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These are not scare quotes but to draw the attention to the fact that when you read the article there is nothing to show that she is either. She has organised a storytelling festival but there is no mention of her being a storyteller herself and there is no suggestion that she is a philanthropist in the sense that she has made large donations of her own money to charitable causes. I suppose she could be described as a "festival organiser" and "real-estate developer" but this may not be the tone the article creator was aiming at. It would have been better if I had said this in my nomination I think. I have just look at the page for the festival that she founded...it is unbelievably promotional. I shall be taking a hatchet to it soon. --Dom from Paris (talk) 09:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 05:58, 31 July 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.