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 redirect to
Family of Barack Obama#Maternal relations. There are several valid concerns that family relationship to an important figure usually does not confer notability (and in this case it is an extended family), and there is a clear consensus that there should not be a separate article. On the question on whether the content should be merged there is no consensus, so I will not delete this outright. Since the subject already has a paragraph in the "Family of Barack Obama" article I will redirect there without further changes.
Sjakkalle(Check!)11:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment - A Charlotte Observer story with depth of coverage
like this is certainly a valid piece of evidence of notability, whatever the reason for it. A second piece is needed to prove it, though. Payne's academic work doesn't appear to be widely cited, so that doesn't help. If, however, some pre-death coverage can be found - or an obit in another major newspaper - then Payne is notable. --
ThaddeusB (
talk)
16:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Not at all. If she'd earned it in 1927 then it would have been relatively unusual, but there were plenty of women with PhDs by the time she got hers. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:46, 3 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete The academic notability rules are not time sensitive. Either she meets one of the clear criteria or she does not. Writting one book in most subjects does not make someone notable.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
05:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Delete I really want to find a reason to support this. However, anyone can have an obit.
WP:GNG is about a subject having editorial content apart from passing mentions. Although an obit is not a passing mention, it is not really content based on editorial choice that it was worthy of space. An obit is almost a mandatory mention. Discarding all obit and related content it is difficult to support notability. Having a book published does not confer notability unless the book meets certain standards of import. I just don't see a policy based reason to claim uninherited notability for this subject.--
TonyTheTiger (
T /
C /
WP:FOUR /
WP:CHICAGO /
WP:WAWARD)
02:33, 6 July 2014 (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.
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 redirect to
Family of Barack Obama#Maternal relations. There are several valid concerns that family relationship to an important figure usually does not confer notability (and in this case it is an extended family), and there is a clear consensus that there should not be a separate article. On the question on whether the content should be merged there is no consensus, so I will not delete this outright. Since the subject already has a paragraph in the "Family of Barack Obama" article I will redirect there without further changes.
Sjakkalle(Check!)11:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Comment - A Charlotte Observer story with depth of coverage
like this is certainly a valid piece of evidence of notability, whatever the reason for it. A second piece is needed to prove it, though. Payne's academic work doesn't appear to be widely cited, so that doesn't help. If, however, some pre-death coverage can be found - or an obit in another major newspaper - then Payne is notable. --
ThaddeusB (
talk)
16:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)reply
Not at all. If she'd earned it in 1927 then it would have been relatively unusual, but there were plenty of women with PhDs by the time she got hers. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:46, 3 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Delete The academic notability rules are not time sensitive. Either she meets one of the clear criteria or she does not. Writting one book in most subjects does not make someone notable.
John Pack Lambert (
talk)
05:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Delete I really want to find a reason to support this. However, anyone can have an obit.
WP:GNG is about a subject having editorial content apart from passing mentions. Although an obit is not a passing mention, it is not really content based on editorial choice that it was worthy of space. An obit is almost a mandatory mention. Discarding all obit and related content it is difficult to support notability. Having a book published does not confer notability unless the book meets certain standards of import. I just don't see a policy based reason to claim uninherited notability for this subject.--
TonyTheTiger (
T /
C /
WP:FOUR /
WP:CHICAGO /
WP:WAWARD)
02:33, 6 July 2014 (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.