Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lempi Rothovius
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Timotheus Canens (talk | contribs) at 09:16, 5 December 2010 (Closing debate, result was delete). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 09:16, 5 December 2010 by Timotheus Canens (talk | contribs) (Closing debate, result was delete)
- 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. T. Canens (talk) 09:16, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Lempi Rothovius
- Lempi Rothovius (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Nonnotable supercentenarian without reliable sources. See WT:WOP#Common deletion outcomes. More as needed. JJB 23:49, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:53, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Being the nation's oldest verified person ever is notable Longevitydude (talk) 19:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This one doesn't even pretend to have any reliable sources. WP:SNOW? David in DC (talk) 21:58, 3 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I did find one source, a report about her death [1], but only one. As I have argued above, simply being the oldest person in a given country does not grant automatic notability. The usual Wikipedia guidelines for sourcing must be met, and they are not met for this subject. (There is no justification to call for a Snow Keep, however, since discussion here is divided.) --MelanieN (talk) 21:44, 4 December 2010 (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.