Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Butler (3rd nomination)


 * 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 and redirect to List of British supercentenarians.  Sandstein  22:19, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Annie Butler
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Born, married, widowed, moved, died. WP:NOPAGE, WP:PERMASTUB EEng (talk) 02:32, 19 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List of British supercentenarians. WP:LPI with no claim of significance beyond her age. Sam Sailor Talk! 07:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor Talk! 07:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor Talk! 07:58, 19 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Third nom now. As previously, meets WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 09:20, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of British supercentenarians. WP:LPI with no claim of significance beyond her age. The two other deletions discussions really offer nothing of note. One ends in no consensus no real arguments. The other for keep contained only one argument.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 09:37, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect to List of British supercentenarians. That page already has mini-bios. What little we know here can be put in a mini-bio.  This is precisely the solution "no stand-alone article; include it in a list" that WP:NOPAGE was created for. David in DC (talk) 15:33, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of British supercentenarians. Non-notable person who received marginal coverage on the sole basis of age.  Better covered as a one- or two-sentence entry in the British supercentenarians list.  Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:54, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No evidence of the type of coverage that would satisfy WP:N for a stand-alone article. Redirection can (and usually does) follow deletion. Canadian   Paul  18:46, 26 November 2015 (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.