Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dorothy Garrett Smith


 * 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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) sst✈discuss 02:35, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Dorothy Garrett Smith

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

She is a regional representative to a state  school board. Such positions do not lead to the assumption of notability.  DGG ( talk ) 05:03, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:18, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:18, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:18, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as any sources are almost certainly going to be archived here I still am not seeing any convincingly better improvement for a local school board member. SwisterTwister   talk  05:19, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Local school board member who was elected to state board of education. First woman president of the state board of education. Represented nine parishes. Qualifies as regional officeholder, as would a public service commissioner. Billy Hathorn (talk) 12:53, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Notability: Politicians and judges who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members or former members of a national, state or provincial legislature.[12] This also applies to persons who have been elected to such offices but have not yet assumed them. (The state board of education would fall under sub-national or provincewide office in these cases.)Billy Hathorn (talk) 15:57, 30 October 2015 (UTC) (It's a statewide office with single-member districts.) Billy Hathorn (talk) 22:07, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * That clause is usually for state assemblies/senates, not for people on a state school board. czar  03:08, 31 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Low-level politician (on state school board), even as president, is not sufficient for automatic notability (which I don't believe in anyway). Only sources in this case are local, so this subject is not asserted as a remarkable topic of wider import. Looks like there's quite a mess in Category:School board members in Louisiana/Wisconsin... czar  14:35, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Doesn't remotely make a difference if she is on the school board at the local level, state level or national level. The question is does she meet notability according to GNG. All GNG requires, is that she be covered in RS and not be fleeting. There are plenty of people included in WikiPedia, from Kardashians, to Hiltons, to Spencer-Churchills who are included on WikiPedia not for doing something but for having their non-contributions noted by the media. Likewise, there are plenty of scientists and academics who have contributed to society whose service is not noted in secondary media and thus they are not included in WikiPedia, regardless of how beneficial to mankind their contributions may be. This woman contributed to society and was covered in the press. As for the statement "sources are almost certainly going to be archived" that is totally irrelevant. RS guidelines do not require that sources be on-line. Further, GNG doesn't require that sources be provided, only proved to exist. Barring the primary sources and non-reliable sources given on the file, there are 7 articles from either the New Orleans Times-Picayune or the Minden Press-Herald. The Times-Picayune is a well-known paper the Minden Press-Herald, though regional has been awarded by the Louisiana Press association for investigative reporting, albeit at a later period, still of record. 5 of the articles cited, show Smith in the headline, so though no on-line access is given they would appear to be substantially about the subject. In addition, in the Picayune article, there are indications that further sources may well exist, as she "was active in the National School Board Association And The Southern Region School Board Association". SusunW (talk) 14:17, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The regional-ness of the school board appointment matters not for the GNG but the secondary notability guidelines (e.g., the politician guidelines) that approve articles even without a showing of sources, so that's why it makes a different there. As for the general notability guideline, merely appearing in an obituary and local news alongside a handful of mentions in articles primarily about the board and not her leaves us with mostly primary sources (some inappropriate at that) with which to write the rest of the article. As for other articles, other stuff exists—when judging these sources on their merits, this subject's coverage is marginal. czar  15:54, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep You don't get an obituary like the one she had if you're not notable. She passes GNG, as per . In addition, if a county clerk is notable because they are elected officials, why not a school board? I suspect due to the era we're dealing with that many of the secondary sources are in print, but I see enough here to keep the article even if a few references need cleanup. Slighly offtopic, but to answer an earlier statement in this dicussion, as a librarian, I take issue with the idea that everything gets archived digitally. That's just not true. There is a ton of information sitting on microfilm that still has yet to be digitized so that it's accessible to anyone with an internet connection. Assuming that human information is all digitized (or even available to the general public) is just wrong and shows a lack of familiarity with sourcing information. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:55, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 04:08, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep, president of state school board passes requirements. Appears to pass GNG too. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:57, 7 November 2015 (UTC).


 * I don't think she passes the politician guideline if that's what you meant. State school board president is not included in Template:Current Louisiana statewide political officials, which should give a good idea on what counts. Not sure if otherwise notable. Rainbow unicorn (talk) 17:43, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete It's an interesting and well written article, but it lacks significant third party coverage about her, the article subject. Much of the more promising sources are primarily about the school board, or educational institutions, but not specifically about her in a sense which satisfies GNG. Can anyone find and add any source which genuniely infer notability on her? isfutile:P (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Category:Connecticut State Board of Education members has seven entries. The Louisiana board has eleven entries. There are four entries in Category:Portland, Maine School Board members. Billy Hathorn (talk) 04:11, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete A hyper-local figure simply not notable enough for a global encyclopaedia. AusLondonder (talk) 22:57, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. She could also qualify as a local politician with adequate sources though her role was statewide. There is a place for "local poltiicians" with sourcing under the Wikipedia rules. 2. Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage is the specific line in the rules. Billy Hathorn (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2015 (UTC) She died before Internet was widely available; this makes it harder to find more sources. Billy Hathorn (talk) 01:57, 11 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep SusunW and Rich Farmbrough are correct, this obviously passes GNG! --MurderByDeadcopy"bang!" 17:36, 13 November 2015 (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.