- 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 delete. MelanieN ( talk) 04:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- Soohyun Park ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Any claim to notability here relates to the subject winning a national spelling bee as a child. Arguably falls foul of WP:SINGLEEVENT. Cordless Larry ( talk) 15:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- For added bonus, the "references" here are a press release from the spelling bee's organizers, and a deadlink of a single news article. Agreed that this is a WP:BLP1E — there's no discernible reason why she'd still be a topic that people are actually still looking for almost a decade later, and the referencing is not strong enough to get her over WP:GNG. Admittedly a consensus was once established that winners of national spelling bees were eligible for Wikipedia articles — but BLP1E didn't exist yet when that happened, and given that evolution in our policies I'm not seeing how it could possibly survive the collision with BLP1E as things stand now. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 20:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - creating Wikipedia articles on someone based on their being a precocious child creates unfair expectations on them if they grow up to be anything less than the next Fred Koch or Terence Tao. Blythwood ( talk) 01:40, 28 February 2016 (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 delete. MelanieN ( talk) 04:09, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
- Soohyun Park ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Any claim to notability here relates to the subject winning a national spelling bee as a child. Arguably falls foul of WP:SINGLEEVENT. Cordless Larry ( talk) 15:42, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal ( talk) 18:01, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
- For added bonus, the "references" here are a press release from the spelling bee's organizers, and a deadlink of a single news article. Agreed that this is a WP:BLP1E — there's no discernible reason why she'd still be a topic that people are actually still looking for almost a decade later, and the referencing is not strong enough to get her over WP:GNG. Admittedly a consensus was once established that winners of national spelling bees were eligible for Wikipedia articles — but BLP1E didn't exist yet when that happened, and given that evolution in our policies I'm not seeing how it could possibly survive the collision with BLP1E as things stand now. Delete. Bearcat ( talk) 20:34, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 03:23, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
- Delete - creating Wikipedia articles on someone based on their being a precocious child creates unfair expectations on them if they grow up to be anything less than the next Fred Koch or Terence Tao. Blythwood ( talk) 01:40, 28 February 2016 (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.