Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carol Adams (educator)


 * 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. Overwhelming consensus to keep. Even the nominator has now switched their vote to !Keep. Consensus shows that recent improvements to the article are enough to evade deletion. (non-admin closure) Kieran207 ( talk - Contribs ) 19:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Carol Adams (educator)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Biography of a non-notable person. Only reference is to an obituary, and overall doesn't seem to meet notability guidelines TimeEngineer (talk) 17:33, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

*DeleteMy own search turned up very few sources, in fact, only two. It's also worth mentioning that the article quality is absolutely subpar. Full of nonsensical trivia and unencyclopedic language. Fails majority of the WP:NACADEMIC criteria, which I suppose doesn't matter because she fails WP:GNG anyways.-- Kieran207 ( talk - Contribs ) 01:27, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Head of a notable teaching organization, and pivotal as a leader of that organization, would appear to pass WP:PROF. More, the reason for that criterion is that coverage of her role as head of organization is likely to exist, as indeed it does: . The nominator's claim of "only reference" seems to indicate a failure of the nominator to perform WP:BEFORE: That is indeed currently the only reference already in the article, but the nominator should be looking for references that exist outside the article, not judging articles solely by the references that have already been added. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:02, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sad to see this on International Women's Day. Long article about her in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography is easy to find and should suffice. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:14, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Agree with David Eppstein & StarryGrandma, WP:Before would show Notability.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 21:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Article has been improved, I change my vote to Keep.--- Kieran207 ( talk - Contribs ) 13:32, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Kaybeesquared (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep including per WP:ANYBIO, "has an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography or similar publication," and the essay WP:DINC. Beccaynr (talk) 03:04, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Added more refs. Tons more if people want to show her work with GTC, contrary to nominator or Kieran207 . Davidstewartharvey (talk) 07:37, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep have added citations to article assist the case for improvement rather than deletion. Apologies if not followed protocols as a new user.
 * Strong Keep - Carol Adams has a lengthy ODNB article - a reliable source with strong notability and sourcing requirements of its own.Stinglehammer (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep When I nominated the article, I saw an article about a teacher, with what I considered to be very little notable information. I did do a WP:BEFORE check, searching for news articles and webpages, and came up empty. That, combined with the flags that the article has had for 5 years and the only reference being an obit, merited a AfD discussion in my mind. The article is vastly improved now. I see this as being the benefit of the AfD process. TimeEngineer (talk) 18:17, 9 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.