Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Barnes
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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, lacking reliable sources to demonstrate notability. 1 != 2 16:51, 15 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maggie Barnes[edit]
- Maggie Barnes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Stub article, no substantive coverage, so fails WP:BIO (it's a factoid rather than an article). I had been merging these stubs to List of American supercentenarians, to allow improvement a prelude to possible demeger, but the mergers have been immediately reverted by User:Kitia, so I suggest deletion instead, without prejudice to recreation if notability can be established per WP:BIO. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete notability not established. RMHED (talk) 17:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Hmm...notability is asserted, just not referenced. I'll try and find what I can now. — Rudget speak.work 18:14, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - All I can find is mirror sites, I can't seem to establish notability through citing reliable sources, which would verify any claims. — Rudget speak.work 18:35, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete or Merge No extensive coverage in reliable sources. Nothing here that couldn't be adequately covered in one of the many supercentenarian lists on Wikipedia. Cheers, CP 01:47, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge "third-oldest African American on record ever, and still holds the record for North Carolina's oldest person. Th" is not notable enough for a separate article. it's a shame we had to come here to do the merge--it would have been better if the ed. who objected and been willing to compromise.DGG (talk) 16:21, 11 December 2007 (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.