Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marilyn Barrueta (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 no consensus. L Faraone 01:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Marilyn Barrueta[edit]

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

Long-time teacher whose only notability is being inducted into the National Teachers Hall of Fame. (Most of the inductees listed do not have articles. Being inducted does not make someone inherently notable.) The article, as it stands, is completely unreferenced. The only source given is the (no longer live) announcement of her selection, which does nothing other than list her honors and achievements.[1] There are a few random G-news hits in the local newspaper from when she was selected and a few random Google books that mention her in passing. But I'm not seeing anything that makes me think this is an appropriate topic for an article. Wikipedia is not a memorial. B (talk) 23:45, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- I'll repeat what I wrote in the first nomination which closed as a Keep since I believe nothing has changed since then: "There are only a few ways that a secondary or primary school teacher can obtain national notability, but one of them is a selective National Hall of Fame with significant people (former governors, etc.) on the board of trustees. DGG's logic (he argued for keep) is sound here." -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 01:39, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- What about that confers inherent notability? This would seem to be the very definition of WP:1E. There is absolutely nothing notable here other than one award. --B (talk) 03:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WP:1E refers to a single momentary act of prominence. Being selected for a national honor of this sort comes from a long period of notable work within the field. It can be very hard for us to judge reliably when an educator is doing notable work that is greatly above the sort of work that all decent educators engage in. This is why we err on the side of caution on AfD for educators by usually deleting. But notability is not a wikipedia-in-a-bubble judgment; we always rely on outside agencies to show us what is being recognized and being reported. Those outside agencies can be media, such as the New York Times, universities (distinguished professor appointments), academic journals, Pulitzer prize committees, or, in the case of educators, the national teacher hall of fame. Being mentioned in "a few random Google books" is far above the norm for teachers. The National Executive Council on the teaching of foreign languages appointment is another such recognition (it would be nice to have an RS cite for that but given the teaching Hall of Fame award, I am assuming good faith there). -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 05:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Laudable, but this honor doesn't automatically confer sufficient notability. Perhaps a List of Inductees into the National Teachers Hall of Fame instead of individual articles on people unknown outside a particular community. Gamaliel (talk) 17:04, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The NTHF induction is not really so much a single event, as a recognition of multiple accomplishments: that is, it shows that she has been noted, and therefore is notable. And I think that her NTHF profile together with this profile in the Washington Post (note: although likely triggered by the NTHF, it's not the same as the Post's story about the NTHF induction, which appeared a month earlier) provide sufficient coverage for WP:GNG. This 1996 book citing her as an example of a highly successful teacher also seems relevant to me, although I can't see more than a snippet to tell how deep its coverage goes, and this obituary may also be acceptable as a reliable source despite its lack of formal publication, as the author is a recognized expert in Spanish (named professor at a major university). We have very few articles about beloved high school teachers, for good reason: in most cases their notability is very local. But I think she could be one of the exceptions. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:00, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 02:52, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - NTHF induction imparts notability (IMNSHO). Eeekster (talk) 03:07, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - According to Wikipedia policy, NTHF induction does not impart notability. Notability is imparted by having multiple reliable secondary sources discussing the person or the person's work (WP:GNG). Also, the person fails WP:TEACHER. LK (talk) 09:42, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Appears to pass the GNG, given sources discussed in the course of this discussion. NHTF, Washington Post, etc. There is a difference between people notable only for one event, and people who only come to public attention once for enduring work of a lifetime - applying 1E in this case would be a travesty. Ray^Talk 14:50, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — This subject's award/honor does not approach WP:ANYBIO levels; nothing about it confers automatic notability. Multiple instances of coverage by parties unrelated to the award giver and recipient would be more convincing. But it isn't there, in this case. Otherwise, she horribly fails at WP:PROFESSOR as well as WP:GNG. The 1996 book is not in-depth coverage: one mention in over 280 pages. Votes based on this kind of coverage should be discounted sharply. JFHJr (㊟) 20:58, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As I said at the first AfD, " National Teachers hall of fame is exactly the sort of thing which makes for significance, in this or any other topic. it's a major national award, and she is on their website. " The major national award in a profession is notability. This is totally in accord with the general principle of WP:N -- WP doesn't judge notability , we judge whether the outside world has recognized the notability. This can be done by implication from several substantial references, but it can also be done directly by a major national prize. Those qualified to judge have judged, and we just record that. DGG ( talk ) 06:03, 19 May 2013 (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.