Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deborah Bial


 * 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. Enigmamsg 20:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Deborah Bial

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails to pass GNG. A line or two in Posse Foundation would suffice. Zigzig20s (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete delivering a commencement speech is not in and of itself a sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. A MacArthur "Genius" award, as documented e.g. in the New York Times, is automatic notability regardless of how many commencement speeches she has also delivered. (And even though the coverage of her in that NYT article is only in-passing, there is plenty of in-depth coverage elsewhere). —David Eppstein (talk) 01:45, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Why not mention that in Posse Foundation?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:48, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It can also be mentioned in the article on the foundation; that's not the point. The point is that it makes her independently notable. Put it this way: in the 20-year range from 1991 to 2011, all MacArthur winners have articles (and there are only scattered exceptions before and after). What quality do you think singles her out as the one winner who is somehow not deserving of an article? —David Eppstein (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep: a MacArthur "Genius" award meets WP:ANYBIO; this is a significant honour. Also, Google books preview gives sufficient indication of her research activities having been noted by independent sources. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:19, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - not sure what policy guideline editors are pointing to when they say, a MacArthur "Genius" award meets WP:ANYBIO. 20-30 awards a year? Borderline at best, regardless of the WP:OSE arguments.  Without that, clearly not notable.  Onel 5969  TT me 03:35, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh no, the knee-jerk "delete, just not notable" enthusiasts are here in force now. Have you even read the article we're discussing? Perhaps you could say something substantive about its content, rather than merely responding to what you think it must be like based only on what previous discussion participants have said? —David Eppstein (talk) 04:01, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per David Eppstein and K.e.coffman. A MacArthur is more than enough. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 04:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - as above, agree that the MacArthur "Genius" award gives her notability, as well as the media coverage she has had. Million_Moments (talk) 06:39, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - per above as well. Genius grant is significant Misterpottery (talk) 16:42, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy/Snow Keep. Clearly passes both WP:BIO and WP:PROF. Several notable awards mentioned in the article (quite apart from the MacArthur award which alone would have already been sufficient), several honorary degrees, etc. No need to go further. Nsk92 (talk) 17:01, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep founded a notable organization, won a notable award, sufficient referencing. power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 02:53, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per David Eppstein and K.e.coffman. --The Vintage Feminist (talk) 14:54, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - Easily meets WP:ANYBIO. --  Dane talk  04:25, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Per WP:ANYBIO. Miyagawa (talk) 13:07, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep per WP:ANYBIO. gidonb (talk) 21:16, 3 June 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.