Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anne D'Evergroote

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. Broad consensus to delete--and no one even invoked BLP1E. Drmies (talk) 03:20, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Anne D'Evergroote

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject of this article to meet the standards of WP:N due to lack of multiple, non-trivial references in reliable, third-party sources. There's no Wikipedia policy on the oldest anything being automatically notable by the encyclopedia's standards (also based on long-term consensus, including most recently the redirecting of this World's oldest person). Thus we default to the general notability guidelines and any material of encyclopedic merit can be included on the many longevity-related lists on Wikipedia. Canadian Paul 18:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's not constructive to nominate every one of these articles for deletion. Anne D'Evergroote, like most articles you're nominating, at time of death held the title of "Oldest person ever". If she was simply some old woman at the time of her death, that'd be one of thing, but she's more than that. DN-boards1 (talk) 18:28, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

— Note to closing admin: DN-boards1 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

It's not constructive to recreate articles that have been redirected and deleted by consensus without adding anything new to them. There's nothing in Wikipedia's criteria that says being the oldest person in the world is notable in and of itself, thus we look for non-trivial coverage in multiple, reliable third-party sources, which does not appear to exist in this case. Canadian Paul 18:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It'd be one thing for her to be oldest living person at time of death, but that's not the case here. When she died, she was the oldest person ever. No one had ever surpassed her in age, she was literally the Jeanne Calment of her time. It wasn't until later that someone was able to surpass her in age. DN-boards1 (talk) 18:36, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To quote an IP for the first nom of Pierre Darcourt, ""I suggest - retain this article; this man was the oldest human ever, for a good number of years (based on present knowledge, which is fallible and incomplete). I propose retaining this article, at least until his age is proven incorrect - and exaggerated; or until there is proof of an earlier person older than he. As the 'oldest ever' he will be one of a very small number - possibly fewer than a dozen - Plante, Darcourt, Peters (or D'Evergroote and Boomgard), Filkins, Graham, Izumi - or Williams (and White), and Calment. Eleven in all, some not totally convincingly verified - but Darcourt was! Keep this article." DN-boards1 (talk) 19:28, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per WP:Notability (people): People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 19:22, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly fails WP:SIGCOV. Typical longevity fanfluff article. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 20:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

At the time of her death she was literally the oldest person ever, don't you think that's notable? DN-boards1 (talk) 20:52, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:04, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Christ, how many of these permastubs are there? EEng (talk) 13:38, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails GNG. Age does not confer notability. Jbh ^Talk 20:18, 16 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Even the guidelines at WP:WOP state that merely getting old comes under the rules for 'single event' notability. And here, I'm not seeing a good redirect. NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:41, 16 October 2015 (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.