Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Knight


 * 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 British supercentenarians. Per WP:ATD -- RoySmith (talk) 23:10, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Annie Knight

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No independent notability established beyond her exceptional longevity. We have tables for this. I do not believe that the anecdote about Radio Free Scotland qualifies for WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO, and it's poorly sourced anyway. — JFG talk 17:56, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:01, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep If we have articles at Supercentenarian and List of British supercentenarians, then we are acknowledging some degree of notability for all supercenterarians. Being the oldest of the lot would certainly seem to be. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:19, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * According to the fully tally at List of British supercentenarians, Annie Knight held the "title" of Ye Oldest Living Briton for a grand total of 124 days in 2006. How is that more notable than any of the other people listed there? For most of these people, their only claim to fame is that some longevity aficionados enjoy tracking them. This article smells of WP:NOPAGE. If Ms. Knight's militant activities are deemed worth keeping, they can be listed in a one-paragraph mini-bio at the list article. — JFG talk 22:41, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete This article fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO1E because there is only WP:ROUTINE coverage of her that fails to demonstrate notability and there is no notability guideline that "the oldest x" is notable. The content of the article is pretty much just longevity milestones for other individuals or arbitrary categories, and trivia fluff about political activism and the standard longevity advice. There is almost nothing actually said about her in an article that is supposed to be about her, which demonstrates how the article fails WP:NOPAGE. Her age, life dates, and nationality are already recorded on the List of British supercentenarians, where they are easier to view, so this permanent WP:PERMASTUB is not needed. Newshunter12 (talk) 23:14, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete being the oldest person in a country for 4 months does not make one notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:28, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. While it's true that we used to have a consensus that "oldest living person" was an encyclopedic notability claim in its own right, that's long since been deprecated as not automatic grounds for a Wikipedia article in and of itself anymore — especially because, as happened here, it's a title that repeatedly shifts to a completely new person at indeterminate intervals of weeks or months. If somebody could locate career coverage about her in the context of Radio Free Scotland or her Scottish nationalist activism, then that might change things — but if the only sources that can be provided are dated 2006 and cover her specifically in the context of becoming the country's oldest living person in August and then dying four months later, rather than in the context of doing anything specific, then that's just not enough anymore to earn her a standalone biography separately from her inclusion in List of British supercentenarians itself. A lot of our permitted inclusion criteria circa 2006 were badly thought out (kids being deemed permanently notable for winning spelling bees was a thing back then too) and have been revised or overturned in the intervening decade. Bearcat (talk) 21:11, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of British supercentenarians (with the history preserved under the redirect) in lieu of deletion. The nominator notes, "We have tables for this." I recommend that instead of deleting the article's history, we redirect the article to the person's place in the table by adding an anchor to the person's entry. It is useful to preserve the history so that any interested editors can merge content to List of British supercentenarians if they think the person deserves more than a mention in the table. Cunard (talk) 03:49, 4 November 2018 (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.