Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noëlle Lenoir

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The result was Withdrawn by nominator (non-admin technical closire).Ymblanter (talk) 10:46, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Noëlle Lenoir[edit]

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

Article written by the subject about herself. ~~Unreferenced BLP.~~ Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 23:31, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The sources added establish notability and thank you for the comments below that explain further. Can I close this myself or wait for an admin? Kelly Marie 0812 (talk) 07:43, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Appears to have been created by the subject herself; no references; not notable. LogicalCreator (talk) 07:15, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article says she was a minister in 2002, which makes her automatically notable. I will try to reference.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:58, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, she was indeed a minister, and I linked the fact to the Time.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:06, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:33, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 16:33, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The nominator was quite right to notice the unreferenced state of the article and the at least apparent massive COI of someone creating their own article. However, I do wonder if the nominator then looked any further before nominating. The article actually looks like a rather loose (and unattributed) translation of the French Wikipedia article by a person with reasonable fluency in, but an incomplete mastery of, English - and the lack of references also seems to have come straight from the French Wikipedia article. The French Wikipedia article, it should be noted, has mostly been written by editors other than its subject - so while there still seems to be a COI, it's a somewhat unusual variant. None of the foregoing, of course, relates at all to the subject's notability - but, as Ymblanter has already noted, the subject passes WP:POLITICIAN - arguably, she does so not just for her time as Minister of European Affairs but also for her preceding nine years on the Conseil Constitutionnel, the nearest French equivalent to the American Supreme Court. The GNews results probably satisfy WP:GNG by themselves, though many of the more recent ones in particular have a tendency to be interviews, articles by the subject, or the subject acting as spokesperson for one of a number of groups (though in each case, these seem to be at least as much using her existing prominence to publicise her interests as using her interests to promote herself) - but there are also GBooks results, and while the GScholar results may not be adequate to meet WP:PROF, they still look good for someone who has devoted most of her career to non-academic activities. The article therefore clearly needs some careful attention, but there seem to be good grounds for keeping it. PWilkinson (talk) 23:33, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG. --Bob247 (talk) 22:01, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The referencing added since the nomination establishes notability as a politician holding a position as Minister of European Affairs for France. -- Whpq (talk) 13:39, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Article has neutrality issues, but the subject is notable. She has been covered by multiple secondary sources, including being profiled in Time Magazine, and was the Minister of European Affairs. Meets the general notability guideline.--xanchester (t) 06:22, 28 October 2012 (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.