Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Makenna Turner

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. ✗plicit 00:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Makenna Turner[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)

It seems as though this article fails the notability test for biographies on several accords. Although there are primary sources on this person, it seems like this article contains a lot of information that does not bear any major significance in the realm of academia. All three awards listed are limited to just high schoolers and do not reflect any well-known or significant award outside of college scholarships and high school scholarships (see 2c on Notability (academics)). There only seems to be one publication by this person as a second author, but the paper only seems to have 39 citations which do not reflect a significant impact in the realm of academia which likely also fails the criterion number 7 (see 7a on Notability (academics)). Additionally, the criteria for notability in terms of college athletes and coaches are not met either ([1]).

There is an attempt to relay the significance of the person through familiar relations, but that does not "confer any degree of notability" [2]. The article was deleted once in the past but was objected to on the basis of:

Pubic Figure/Child of Public Figure, has verifiable social media, news appearances, published research. Father has Wikipedia article see "Chris Cole (American Football)". Is a D1 athlete for Stanford University. [3]

However, these conditions are not enough to merit the creation of an article. Additionally, there seems to be a conflict of interest in editing from Lilsnoozyvert which might be the subject herself. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Academics and educators, and Sportspeople. Qx.est (Suufi) ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Engineering, and Colorado. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. She definitely does not meet NPROF, and there is only one ref (local coverage of her being a finalist for a state-wide youth tech award) that could arguably contribute to GNG, which is just not enough. Overall coverage (awards, service) is pretty much what you would expect of a bright young person who earned her way into Stanford.

Source	Independent?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
Source assessment table:
Stanford school profile		? moot	✘ No
Coca Cola Scholar bio		? moot	✘ No
NCWIT award bio		? moot	✘ No
[4]		? 8 independent sentences on her in local newspaper affiliate	? Unknown
Playful Computation group bio		? moot	✘ No
Stanford rowing team bio		? moot	✘ No
NCWIT award announcement		? moot	✘ No
CSEdWeek (presumably supposed to link to award announcement)		? moot	✘ No
BSVD article on BSVD advisory meeting she participated in		? moot	✘ No
MileSplit profile			✘ No
article in local news	largely quotes from her	barely 3 sentences that aren't direct or indirect quotes	✘ No
CBS4 Future Leaders profile	profile from the awarding org	? moot	✘ No
nonexistent website, but very likely not independent		? moot	✘ No
personal website (research)		? moot	✘ No
conference proceedings		moot	✘ No
GS profile of her undergrad adviser		? moot	✘ No
Stanford profile of her undergrad adviser		? moot	✘ No
personal website (blog)		? moot	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

JoelleJay (talk) 22:49, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom and the excellent analysis above. Atchom (talk) 01:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As above. The coverage she has so far points to "may well be notable in the future", not "notable now". -- asilvering (talk) 02:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per source analysis above. We can revisit the article if she ever hits notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per source analysis and per nom. As per WP:RISING, she may one day certainly be notable. At the present, her career is just not profound enough for WP:ACADEMIC or general WP:BIO.Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 17:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and per source analysis above.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 19:15, 7 May 2022 (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.