Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deborah Bone


 * 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. Michig (talk) 09:01, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Deborah Bone

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Appears to be notable for a single event only, namely being the subject of a single song. See WP:SINGLEEVENT. (Note that receiving an MBE is not notable. See here and here.) I guess some of the information in the article could be merged into Disco 2000 (song). Chrisahn (talk) 04:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 05:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 05:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 05:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 05:06, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Selective merge into Disco 2000 (song), as suggested by nominator. I agree the subject is not notable other than for being the subject of this song, so there's no reason to have a separate article. However, it seems worth having a little more info about her role in inspiring the lyrics than Disco 2000 (song) has at present, so some of the material could be merged into a new section, analogous to Common People (song) (but shorter). Qwfp (talk) 09:48, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Being notable for being the subject of a top-ten song is hardly a reason for deletion. The subject is also a Member of the Order of the British Empire, for something unrelated to the song. The first discussion cited by the nominator confirms that such honours "do, of course, contribute to notability"; while the second says of an MBE "Of course having one may contribute to notability: notability is a spectrum, not either/or". The article has citations from multiple, reliable sources, about both of these aspects of the subject's life and achievements. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:25, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the selected quotes give a slightly misleading impression of their author's intent. Here's the complete quote from this discussion about the question 'Is an MBE recipient notable?': "No, the MBE (or OBE) does not confer inherent notability. Consensus is, however, that the CBE (and above) does. Any honours do, of course, contribute to notability." And here are two quotes from this discussion about the question 'Does an MBE confer notability?'. Quote 1: "No, absolutely not. According to the UK Government, there are over 100,000 living members of the order today." Quote 2: "That's too many for every MBE recipient to merit an article purely because of having one. (Of course having one may contribute to notability: notability is a spectrum, not either/or.)" -- Chrisahn (talk) 18:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You prove my point; since nobody is claiming that Bone is notable "purely because of having" an MBE. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:57, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I think we agree that an MBE may contribute to notability. My point was that the selected quotes gave a slightly misleading impression. Thus the complete quotes. -- Chrisahn (talk) 23:10, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable for her contribution to the development of mental health provision in the UK. In my travels I see many male health professionals with articles on wikipedia, establishing for me that notable healthcare contributions and careers are considered notable. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Could you give a few examples, i.e. links to articles? It would probably be helpful if we could compare their contributions and careers. Thanks! -- Chrisahn (talk) 18:49, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability is not comparative but a spectrum. Subject is notable for her "pioneering work in mental health" including Brainbox per the adequate sources for WP notability.Littleolive oil (talk) 15:21, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Does 'The Brainbox' still exist? The website http://www.thebrainbox.org.uk is currently offline. -- Chrisahn (talk) 20:22, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep combination of pioneering work in healthcare AND relation to an iconic song, keep her as a person please. If facts were merged to the song and to health care, - where would a redirect go. We have room for her, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: Some more details why I don't think Bone passes WP:Notability, particularly the requirement of significant coverage: While it is true that several major news sources published an article about Deborah Bone in early 2015 (a few days after her death), no source (except for The Comet, a local newspaper) ran more than this one article, and the content of all these articles is almost identical. See (The second article published by The Comet a few days later is a short text about the reception of its article: .) It appears that most of the sources basically copied the content from The Comet. (Roughly half of them mention The Comet as a source.)  While the meaning of 'significant coverage' is deliberately left vague by WP:N, I think a single article is not significant (even if there are several slightly different copies of it).
 * About Bone's achievements: The article mentions 'The Brainbox' and 'Step2'. I looked for more information about these projects. 'The Brainbox' seems to be a small company offering a single product. It's unclear if it still exists. Its website http://www.thebrainbox.org.uk is currently offline. The Internet Archive last indexed it in November 2018: . 'Step2' appears to be a local and rather specialized service. Its homepage says: "Step2 is an Early Intervention Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service for children and young people in Hertfordshire aged 0-19." The notability of 'The Brainbox' and 'Step2' appears to be rather low.
 * On a more personal note, I'd like to add that I don't want to hurt or offend anyone by nominating the article for deletion. I don't doubt Deborah Bone was a nice person. I just don't think she passes the criteria of WP:N.
 * As the nominator, I can't add a wp:!vote here, but I'd like to add that I would be in favor of a Merge / Redirect to Disco 2000 (song), as Qwfp said above, as opposed a simple Delete. -- Chrisahn (talk) 20:18, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * See Guide to deletion. Bakazaka (talk) 20:53, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! I to a comment. -- Chrisahn (talk) 21:03, 19 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep with a side-order of fish sauce. How does anyone with an MBE warrant a CSD A7? (And if your response to that is "An MBE doesn't mean notable" then you do not understand CSD A7). Andy Dingley (talk) 21:47, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * I read several pages about CSD before I suggested the speedy deletion, and I didn't find anything supporting the assumption that an MBE gives someone "noteworthiness/importance/significance". But that doesn't matter anyway, because it looks like you don't understand the difference between CSD and AfD (hint: this is an AfD discussion), and you don't know how AfD discussions work. Here are a few quotes that may help you. WP:AFD: "Remember that while AfD may look like a voting process, it does not operate like one. Justification and evidence for a response carries far more weight than the response itself. ... Please do not make recommendations on the course of action to be taken that are not sustained by arguments." WP:REPEAT: "Avoid repeating statements previously made in AfD discussions." Enjoy your fish sauce! -- Chrisahn (talk) 22:57, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep Detailed obituaries in the BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Indy, NME and elsewhere and so she easily passes WP:BASIC. No-one, not even the nominator, thinks this should be deleted and so we shouldn't be having this discussion. Andrew D. (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2019 (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.