Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Briony Scott


 * 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 keep. Stifle (talk) 14:24, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Briony Scott

 * – ( View AfD View log )

High school headmistress in Sydney. Author is (2008) who only has 3 edits and may be related to the subject. No distinctive pedagogical achievements disclosed Bumbubookworm (talk) 12:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:38, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete a non-notable educator.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - John Pack Lambert, do you even bother to check articles when you put your comments here? A 5 second Google search would have shown that is simply not true . You need to stop inserting these random and unhelpful contributions to AfDs and actually engage with the discussion properly. Deus et lex (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - Scott is a well-known educator in Australia, she frequently is cited in media articles and the like relating to education and has frequently been cited or featured in external sources, for example, Daily Telegraph, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (Sunday Extra), Sydney Morning Herald, Another Sydney Morning Herald, Guardian - those are just examples (this is not an exhaustive list). The article may have been created by a COI, but that was 14 years ago and it has been substantially worked on by other users since, so the COI argument carries little weight. Deus et lex (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I did do a google search of the subject and am aware that she pops up in the media, but most of these are because she is a guest pundit on education issues occasionally. However, they coverage was not actually about her activities as an educational administrator, ie policies, new educational techniques or specific improvements/achievements. Most of the in-depth stuff in those articles was that she became ill and the personal journey related to that Bumbubookworm (talk) 01:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As I said, Bumbubookworm, the articles I posted are not exhaustive, and not all of them are about her illness. There are a number of profiles about her, which constitute independent significant coverage and go towards meeting WP:BIO. Many educators are not notable for Wikipedia but this is one that should be kept. Deus et lex (talk) 02:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)


 * keep per Deus et lex, this seems to clear GNG; covered in multiple media, contributor to international outlets. --hroest 02:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. For school headmasters and education columnists, the correct notability standard is WP:GNG, not WP:PROF, and the sources listed by Deus et lex look good enough for a pass to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - the article needs revision to incorporate additional sources, but WP:GNG appears to be met. All of these sources are about her activities and expertise as an education administrator: ABC News Australia, 4BC, SMH (opinion), Financial Review. Beccaynr (talk) 22:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have expanded the article and added multiple IRS citations. The subject, let alone the page, clearly satisfies GNG. Keeping this is a no-brainer. Cabrils (talk) 00:47, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep A strong page meeting WP:GNG significant coverage standards, and should therefore remain. LindaSaunders (talk) 12:27, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per Deus et lex. Best, GPL93 (talk) 03:13, 11 March 2021 (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.