Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wertha Pendleton Cole

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The result was withdrawn. Non-admin closure. Ottre 08:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Wertha Pendleton Cole[edit]

Non notable astronomer, I find few if any reliable sources/refs, fails WP:BIO and Wikipedia:Notability (academics). Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 17:20, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- In the light of the NYT obituary which had not surfaced when I put this up for AfD, I would agree the article should remain. I withdraw the nomination. Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 08:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —John Z (talk) 20:11, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. She is surrounded by relatives of more clear notability (her husband and son, and possibly also her father) but notability is not inherited. And she seems to have made little or no impact on astronomy, so I don't see the evidence for passing WP:PROF. Also see WP:DIRECTORY: someone seems to view Wikipedia as a place to publish family history, and it isn't. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2009 (UTC) Later: changing from delete to neutral after finding an obituary for her in the New York Times. Unfortunately it's not available for free online so I can't see whether it says anything of interest about her, but just its existence is enough to make me less certain about deleting this. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:38, 24 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. We may not be able to read that NYT obituary for free online, but we can see that it's 140 words long. [1] Phil Bridger (talk) 16:24, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I would say it barely scapes by as notable from the New York Times obit. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Long or short, a NYT obit is a definitive proof of notability, accepted as such in every afd in the last year at least. DGG (talk) 20:04, 25 January 2009 (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.