Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Matynia-Łyżwińska (2nd 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:48, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Barbara Matynia-Łyżwińska
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per Deletion review/Log/2016 October 18, there are no procedural grounds to relisting this soon, since a new development has taken place. To summarize, from my DRV comment: Since the first AfD, this article has been deleted from Polish Wikipedia (which usually has much lower criteria for notability): pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/biografie/2016:09:08:Barbara Matynia-Łyżwińska. Closing admin there concluded that a minor/local parish magazine and an obituary are not sufficient. As I feel that the deletion arguments (the subject is not notable either as an architect - all she has here is a short online bio at professional association she was a member of - and as an artist - her work is only mentioned in a local, niche, parish magazine) are significantly stronger then the votes to keep (one of which argued that said parish magazine is a sufficient source, the other that women architects are marginalized so we should keep this article to reduce our gender bias in coverage), and as there is no discussion on article's talk, despite my post there, I think we need to revisit this. Bottom line - not all architects are notable, and this one hasn't done anything to merit being in an encylopedia; ditto as an artist she fails WP:Notability (artists) - her work has not attracted attention form anywhere but said local parish magazine, and the claims of "multiple exhibitions" are not substantiated except said parish article based significantly on interview with the subject. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:28, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not all women need Wikipedia articles. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 23:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you could consider rephrasing this? Because as you wrote it, it comes across as an argument that we should be more willing to delete the article because the subject is female, which is both not in accordance with any of our policies and extremely offensive. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:21, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - As the nominator of the first Afd, I thought there was not enough sources and the keep votes were overruled by more in-depth delete votes. I still stand by that in this second nomination.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:23, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Meets WP:BASIC per comments in first AFD closed September 26, 2016. Hmlarson (talk) 03:31, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you clarify which comments you find convincing? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:12, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I find the detailed explanation by Piotrus convincing. We require reliable third party sources and over here it seems the sources are part of the society or a parish magazine. I do not see any claim of significance except for that gold medal - which itself seems to be a niche award and sourced to the society itself. Although the subject was in the pre-internet era and there was a possibility of non-English sources, what convinces me towards a delete is that it was deleted on the Polish Wikipedia itself where Polish speakers could analysed Polish sources as well. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:07, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:43, 29 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per Polish wikipedia. K.e.coffman (talk) 23:03, 5 November 2016 (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.