Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Betsy Baker


 * 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. Nothing here to pass WP:BIO. Not the first to reach 113 years of age, but possibly the second?. No.  BLACK KITE  01:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Betsy Baker

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Another inadequately referenced stub on an old person, fails WP:BIO test of substantive coverage in WP:RS. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:18, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete notability not established. RMHED (talk) 17:42, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep easily established notability by being very old (the oldest alive in her time) a long time ago. &#39;&#39;&#91;&#91;User:Kitia&#124;Kitia&#93;&#93;&#39;&#39; (talk) 20:36, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply. Sigh. Please, Kitia, do take time to read WP:BIO.  Being very old does not establish notability. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Again, they totaly forgot about mentioning really old people in there. I don't think anyone would except deletion of Jeanne Calment as a good-faith nom, but what about these guys? They wer local celebrities, and I think I saw something somewhere about that warranting the article. &#39;&#39;&#91;&#91;User:Kitia&#124;Kitia&#93;&#93;&#39;&#39; (talk) 13:29, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * If you want to argue for a change to WP:BIO, you are free to do so at WT:BIO. But unless and until WP:BIO is changed, being old does not make up for lack of substantive coverage in reliable sources. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:39, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. non notable per WP:BIO. - Gallo glass  14:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment I think for WP:BIO to say, "1 must be the oldest person in the world to establish notability," or by longevity, is far too specific. For example, it also doesn't explicitt say 1 must be the tallest or heaviest person in the world. Anyways, I don't know how much of WP:BIO an article like this must pass. For example, it doesn't pass all of WP:BIO, as this person isn't a politician or composer. But if this person passes 1 sentence in WP:BIO, I assume it is not enough. Neal (talk) 16:20, 9 December 2007 (UTC).
 * Reply See WP:BIO. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:42, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep bad faith nom, historical case of extreme longevity. Has sorces and is cited as on of 500 famous Nebraskans. I'll bust your beak! (time for some beak bustin'!) 00:36, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * What gives you the impression in the less than 24 hours you've been editing on wikipedia that this is a bad faith nomination? - Gallo glass  01:27, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I'm awfully suspicious of this person. Neal (talk) 01:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC).
 * I'm kinda new to this Wikipedia thing, so I thought that it would help me in the arguement, since it hasn't been going well. My case still stands, however. I'll bust your beak! (time for some beak bustin'!) 22:57, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Its always best to assume good faith among other editors and in this case there are reasonable grounds for this AfD. That said, you are very welcome to take part in any and all discussions and the length of time you have edited is no handicap. And welcome to wikipedia. - Gallo glass  23:37, 10 December 2007 (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.