- 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. Opinions are divided between deleting because she fails the notability requirements for academics, and keeping because she meets WP:GNG. Sandstein 08:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Gladys Ngetich
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Gladys Ngetich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I found three sources congratulating Ngetich on an award and a mention in a BBC-article. I would argue that does not meet WP:GNG. WP:NOTNEWS. Kleuske ( talk) 08:27, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Delete students are almost never yet notable as academics. She may one day be notable, but is not notable yet. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 00:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. Some coverage for being an African women in tech - does not reach GNG. Not close to meeting any SNG (e.g. PROF). Icewhiz ( talk) 07:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep, (or alternatively move to Draft: space) several new articles in BBC etc written this and last week, likely more coverage in reliable sources in the coming weeks. John Cummings ( talk) 19:06, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Despite her being a student, I initially thought there might be enough here - but combined with the conflict of interest, I think this is WP:Too Soon. Tacyarg ( talk) 01:11, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. It may be true that students are not notable as academics but given the news coverage she has received, this one has set an example of perseverance which has been widely appreciated. Given the additional sources, the biography now clearly meets GNG. It seems to me that any conflict of interest is of secondary importance.-- Ipigott ( talk) 08:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. It would be nice to support a BLP on this admirable person out of sympathy, but acheivements yet are just not adequate WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe ( talk) 09:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC).
- Keep. Passes GNG on the available sources. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 09:49, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Student clearly fails WP:PROF and WP:NOTNEWS a case of WP:TOOSOON at this point. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 10:57, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Passes GNG. And if it is too soon, I'd go with draftifying (as John Cummings suggested above). XOR'easter ( talk) 15:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Adequately referenced. She holds an aeronautical engineering patent with Rolls Royce. User:Fsmatovu 18:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Enough sources, [1] [2] for justifying the separate page. Rzvas ( talk) 19:24, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- All that the sources say are that she is an engineering student. As yet there is no achievement.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
22:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC).
- Given that this argument appears to be based on
general notability not
academic notability, no achievement is required. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Some sort of notable achievement is required to pass even WP:GNG, and I do not think that gaining admission to a graduate engineering course is enough for that. Xxanthippe ( talk) 06:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC).
- Given that this argument appears to be based on
general notability not
academic notability, no achievement is required. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- All that the sources say are that she is an engineering student. As yet there is no achievement.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
22:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC).
- Comment I nominated, with some trepidation, because all sources available refer to the same fact. I should have mentioned WP:NOTNEWS in the nomination, though. Kleuske ( talk) 10:09, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Leaning delete. This is a well-sourced if brief article about a hard-working and intelligent woman but unfortunately, I don't see notability here in Wikipedia's terms. Aside from profiles and routine coverage by the university, she has been mentioned in only a couple of newspapers and then only for being awarded a Rhodes Scholarship. It's a prestigious award, but let's not forget that 100 awards are made each year and it is essentially a funding grant to people who are about to begin their doctorate. Are we suggesting that everyone who receives it (and most will get some coverage in the news) should be given articles here? Or for that matter, any doctoral student who has won a substantial funding award? Even given the adversity she has faced and the remarkability of her achievement relative to her background, WP is about sustained coverage of her or her work in secondary sources which typically (in academia or the professions) amounts to a long-standing and original contribution to her field. She doesn't meet that standard (indeed, it's hard enough getting tenured professors to pass AfD these days). She may be set for big things, but this article has landed too soon. As someone who creates articles in this area, take it from me that there are plenty of far more notable women in academia and engineering who lack articles where our efforts are better directed. — Noswall59 ( talk) 10:39, 4 August 2018 (UTC).
- Delete per the cogent deletion arguments above. Very impressive and all that, but clearly fails notability at this point. Johnbod ( talk) 11:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Suggestion: If the decision is delete, then move to draft space, there appears to be continuing news coverage so it is not unreasonable to think that this person will reach the Wikipedia notability threshold fairly soon. John Cummings ( talk) 15:29, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree that she does not pass our notability guidelines for professors, in large part because she is not a professor. She also doesn't pass our notability guidelines for politicians, soccer players, or astronomical objects. The relevant guideline is WP:GNG. Multiple recent (July 2018) Kenyan news stories profile her in depth [3] [4] [5], and the BBC in January 2018 included another in-depth profile of her as part of a story about the scarcity of female engineers. (There's also coverage here and here which can help provide content for the article although not contributing to notability.) She is a Rhodes Scholar and has won multiple other less-famous awards. Her recovery after a poor showing in the Kenyan high school entrance examination has been described by media in other African countries as a test case for their own exam systems [6]. None of these individual accomplishments are automatically notable, but they put the lie to the assertion that there is nothing of significance in her history, or only a single event to which this article could be redirected. For that matter, having a significant accomplishment is nowhere in GNG (see any number of "famous for being famous" celebrities). The clear wording of GNG is that when someone is covered in-depth by multiple reliable sources they are notable. Either we follow that or we revise GNG to be explicitly based on editors' opinions of the significance of the subject rather than based on outside coverage. — David Eppstein ( talk) 19:57, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- David Eppstein: the WP:NPROF guidelines, despite their abbreviation, are not just confined to professors but academics, defined as "someone engaged in scholarly research or higher education". As a DPhil student and Rhodes scholar, she is an academic in that sense so WP:NPROF applies to her where WP:NSPORT and WP:NASTRO don't; hence the fact that she fails NPROF is important. As you point out, GNG is a different matter and the outcome will probably depend on it's interpretation here. — Noswall59 ( talk) 12:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC).
- Keep - Multiple reliable sources have done in-depth coverage of her. She may yet do more, and we can only speculate about her future, but she seems to have ticked the central box of WP:GNG easily already. Mattyjohn ( talk) 22:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. Opinions are divided between deleting because she fails the notability requirements for academics, and keeping because she meets WP:GNG. Sandstein 08:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
Gladys Ngetich
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Gladys Ngetich ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I found three sources congratulating Ngetich on an award and a mention in a BBC-article. I would argue that does not meet WP:GNG. WP:NOTNEWS. Kleuske ( talk) 08:27, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kenya-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 ( 🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then ( ping me) 18:16, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Delete students are almost never yet notable as academics. She may one day be notable, but is not notable yet. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 00:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. Some coverage for being an African women in tech - does not reach GNG. Not close to meeting any SNG (e.g. PROF). Icewhiz ( talk) 07:37, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep, (or alternatively move to Draft: space) several new articles in BBC etc written this and last week, likely more coverage in reliable sources in the coming weeks. John Cummings ( talk) 19:06, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Despite her being a student, I initially thought there might be enough here - but combined with the conflict of interest, I think this is WP:Too Soon. Tacyarg ( talk) 01:11, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. It may be true that students are not notable as academics but given the news coverage she has received, this one has set an example of perseverance which has been widely appreciated. Given the additional sources, the biography now clearly meets GNG. It seems to me that any conflict of interest is of secondary importance.-- Ipigott ( talk) 08:59, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. It would be nice to support a BLP on this admirable person out of sympathy, but acheivements yet are just not adequate WP:Too soon. Xxanthippe ( talk) 09:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC).
- Keep. Passes GNG on the available sources. The Drover's Wife ( talk) 09:49, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Student clearly fails WP:PROF and WP:NOTNEWS a case of WP:TOOSOON at this point. Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk) 10:57, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Passes GNG. And if it is too soon, I'd go with draftifying (as John Cummings suggested above). XOR'easter ( talk) 15:22, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Adequately referenced. She holds an aeronautical engineering patent with Rolls Royce. User:Fsmatovu 18:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Enough sources, [1] [2] for justifying the separate page. Rzvas ( talk) 19:24, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
- All that the sources say are that she is an engineering student. As yet there is no achievement.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
22:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC).
- Given that this argument appears to be based on
general notability not
academic notability, no achievement is required. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Some sort of notable achievement is required to pass even WP:GNG, and I do not think that gaining admission to a graduate engineering course is enough for that. Xxanthippe ( talk) 06:01, 4 August 2018 (UTC).
- Given that this argument appears to be based on
general notability not
academic notability, no achievement is required. —
David Eppstein (
talk)
04:00, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- All that the sources say are that she is an engineering student. As yet there is no achievement.
Xxanthippe (
talk)
22:48, 3 August 2018 (UTC).
- Comment I nominated, with some trepidation, because all sources available refer to the same fact. I should have mentioned WP:NOTNEWS in the nomination, though. Kleuske ( talk) 10:09, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Leaning delete. This is a well-sourced if brief article about a hard-working and intelligent woman but unfortunately, I don't see notability here in Wikipedia's terms. Aside from profiles and routine coverage by the university, she has been mentioned in only a couple of newspapers and then only for being awarded a Rhodes Scholarship. It's a prestigious award, but let's not forget that 100 awards are made each year and it is essentially a funding grant to people who are about to begin their doctorate. Are we suggesting that everyone who receives it (and most will get some coverage in the news) should be given articles here? Or for that matter, any doctoral student who has won a substantial funding award? Even given the adversity she has faced and the remarkability of her achievement relative to her background, WP is about sustained coverage of her or her work in secondary sources which typically (in academia or the professions) amounts to a long-standing and original contribution to her field. She doesn't meet that standard (indeed, it's hard enough getting tenured professors to pass AfD these days). She may be set for big things, but this article has landed too soon. As someone who creates articles in this area, take it from me that there are plenty of far more notable women in academia and engineering who lack articles where our efforts are better directed. — Noswall59 ( talk) 10:39, 4 August 2018 (UTC).
- Delete per the cogent deletion arguments above. Very impressive and all that, but clearly fails notability at this point. Johnbod ( talk) 11:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Suggestion: If the decision is delete, then move to draft space, there appears to be continuing news coverage so it is not unreasonable to think that this person will reach the Wikipedia notability threshold fairly soon. John Cummings ( talk) 15:29, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. I agree that she does not pass our notability guidelines for professors, in large part because she is not a professor. She also doesn't pass our notability guidelines for politicians, soccer players, or astronomical objects. The relevant guideline is WP:GNG. Multiple recent (July 2018) Kenyan news stories profile her in depth [3] [4] [5], and the BBC in January 2018 included another in-depth profile of her as part of a story about the scarcity of female engineers. (There's also coverage here and here which can help provide content for the article although not contributing to notability.) She is a Rhodes Scholar and has won multiple other less-famous awards. Her recovery after a poor showing in the Kenyan high school entrance examination has been described by media in other African countries as a test case for their own exam systems [6]. None of these individual accomplishments are automatically notable, but they put the lie to the assertion that there is nothing of significance in her history, or only a single event to which this article could be redirected. For that matter, having a significant accomplishment is nowhere in GNG (see any number of "famous for being famous" celebrities). The clear wording of GNG is that when someone is covered in-depth by multiple reliable sources they are notable. Either we follow that or we revise GNG to be explicitly based on editors' opinions of the significance of the subject rather than based on outside coverage. — David Eppstein ( talk) 19:57, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
- David Eppstein: the WP:NPROF guidelines, despite their abbreviation, are not just confined to professors but academics, defined as "someone engaged in scholarly research or higher education". As a DPhil student and Rhodes scholar, she is an academic in that sense so WP:NPROF applies to her where WP:NSPORT and WP:NASTRO don't; hence the fact that she fails NPROF is important. As you point out, GNG is a different matter and the outcome will probably depend on it's interpretation here. — Noswall59 ( talk) 12:41, 7 August 2018 (UTC).
- Keep - Multiple reliable sources have done in-depth coverage of her. She may yet do more, and we can only speculate about her future, but she seems to have ticked the central box of WP:GNG easily already. Mattyjohn ( talk) 22:36, 6 August 2018 (UTC)
- 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.