Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Egbertje Leutscher-de Vries

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 List of Dutch supercentenarians. MBisanz ^talk 17:08, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Egbertje Leutscher-de Vries

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

Simply being the oldest person in the Netherlands is not sufficient for notability under WP:GNG. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:02, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:15, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:15, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The lady is notable solely for longevity, something that is to become increasingly common, we are told. The article has no place here. Nor do any similar articles. People have to be notable for something other than living longer than other folk. Fiddle Faddle 10:29, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think it is notable that she was the oldest in Netherlands for around two years. she was lived 111 years and 296 days, making it the 4th oldest person ever in Netherlands and one of oldest people in the world validated by Gerontology Research Group, an organization that tracks the ages of supercentenarians.--Inception2010 (talk) 14:25, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing in the WP:GNG that states "having your age verified by the GRG makes you notable". If you remove the trivia and statements sourced to birth and marriage records you're left with nothing that isn't already available in List of Dutch supercentenarians CommanderLinx (talk) 11:39, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG There's nothing notable here. She surely belongs on the Gerontology Research Group's list of supercentenarians. Assuming her age has been "validated" to that organization's exacting standards. But Wikipedia is not a web-hosting service for thie GRG. To appear in this encyclopedia, it's necessary for subject to be notable as that term is defined here, meaning it must be covered in multiple independent WP:Reliable sources. Reviewing what small bit of references appear on the page reveals very little in the way of notability, as that term is defined on Wikipedia. The two refs to Iedereen heeft een geschiedenis are useless. It's a primary source. Using it would be prohibited original research What's left is a two-line obit from de Telegraf. Really? C'mon. David in DC (talk) 19:38, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to List of Dutch supercentenarians. Clearly fails WP:GNG. If you remove the unsourced statements, trivia, and sentences that are sourced to birth and marriage records you're left with just a name, age and country. This is all available in the Dutch supers article so there's no need for a standalone article. CommanderLinx (talk) 11:43, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Usual nonsense. EEng (talk) 14:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No notability other than living long, and the guidelines at WP:WOP tell us that that isn't enough. NewYorkActuary (talk) 00:04, 17 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.