Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geraldine Doyle


 * 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. Courcelles 05:26, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Geraldine Doyle

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:INHERIT, not notable independently of poster Geschichte (talk) 23:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment She was one of those woman from her generation, her biography expand the topic about women who worked in factories those years. The mainstream media is also featuring her death it's definitevely notable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.79.115.146 (talk) 23:54, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep: sufficiently important iconic figure of the changing roles and functions of a large segment of American women during WWII; backed by news reports of death. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 23:58, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:12, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or at least merge to "Rosie". Johnbod (talk) 00:19, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Sorry, but the current news reports all fall under WP:ONEEVENT or WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The pertinent information is already in the Rosie the Riveter article.  That "Rosie the Riveter" is an iconic image is undisputed.  Doyle herself is not; the article admits that she didn't know herself to be the model for the poster until the mid-1980s.   Ravenswing  00:40, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Of course current articles would be memorials, she just died. However, this article has been on Wikipedia since 2005, and despite not knowing for 40 years that she wasn't the subject of this iconic image, she did know (after 1984) for 26 years that she was the subject of this image.  As far as whether the pertinent information is in the "Rosie" article, consider her own words:  Doyle herself was quick to correct people who referred to her as Rosie the Riveter. “She would say that she was the ‘We Can Do It!” girl,” Gregg said. “She never wanted to take anything away from the other Rosies.”   68.97.117.233 (talk) 08:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.39.126.20 (talk) 01:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep she is the model of an iconic woman in one of the most critical moments of the last century. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.216.127.251 (talk) 01:49, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, or Merge into article about the poster. This is one of the most recognizable iconic images in the USA of the last 70 years, with continuing very wide usage. Background information about the real person behind this ubiquitously recognizable face is certainly well within project scope. An argument might be made that the main article should be at "We Can Do It!" or some other title, but the referenced information about Geraldine Doyle should be kept, and if nothing else Geraldine Doyle left as a redirect to the article on the artwork if moved. -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:26, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, article may be poorly sourced, but there are thousands of references available.SharedPlanetType (talk) 03:37, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep; verifiable, sufficient sources, exceedingly famous (though not previously by name) individual. Antandrus (talk) 05:58, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: If Geraldine Doyle was significant enough to rate obituaries in the New York Times and Die Welt, she belongs in Wikipedia. There's really no good reason to delete this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.229.46.139 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep per nom and per anon 201.79.115.146 - poorly sourced but decidedly notable - A l is o n  ❤ 06:48, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge, as Infrogmation says. --70.48.231.137 (talk) 07:56, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG and close this discussion per WP:SNOW. Dismas |(talk) 11:15, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

ABSOLUTELY KEEP! - Wikipedia, you are a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.64.230.239 (talk) 10:30, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason that this article, which has been on Wikipedia since 2005 is suddenly up for deletion at the moment of the death of its subject? The big notice of deletion really strikes me as a veiled approach to vandalism and discredit the subject just as she is receiving media attention for her contribution to the war effort and women in general. I would recommend that the deletion flag be removed as soon as possible, and simply go to a discussion of the article itself rather than this strangely timed request for deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.97.117.233 (talk) 06:20, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Added a defense of why the Deletion tag should be recalled on this page with details on the main article's talk page. 68.97.117.233 (talk) 08:14, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

ABSOLUTELY KEEP! Rosie the Riveter is such an important icon to women, it would be a shame to lose the information we have about the woman that inspired her creation. At the very least, link this article to the "Rosie the Riveter" article.


 * The following comments were top-posted; I moved them to the bottom. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 15:57, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Keep for the present generation which has no concept of how this country's manufacturing base contributed to the very character of the nation, and won the war in question. When Britain was struggling to keep itself afloat, it was our manufacturing capacity that lent Great Britain a second chance for a new lease on life and forestalled the nazi juggernaut, fueled by slave manufacturing labor from converting this country's dominant language to German. When Pearl Harbor occurred, it was campaigns like this one that made homemakers like Ms Doyle take a chance away from her cello playing to help the war effort, given the absence of able bodied manpower, though it is probably fortunate, or serendipitous, that she was there for the two week period when the photographer toured her plant and her photo became a poster, and the ensuing campaign became sufficient impetus for millions of women to break stereotype emulate the new icon. By the way, did I mention that we won THAT war. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Marketex (talk • contribs) 19:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. A model for an iconic poster such as this will inevitably receive media coverage, such as we see currently. I also believe WP:ONEEVENT is a poor guideline to apply to such a person. __meco (talk) 20:23, 1 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep ABSOLUTELY KEEP -- Poster is iconic for its feminist import -- and it's essential to know who the real working-class woman behind the image was -- both for historical and feminist reasons.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.122.182.60 (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep! I can't believe this is a question...--The Navigators (talk)-May British Rail Rest in Peace. 00:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Rms125a@hotmail.com (ridiculous to do otherwise) -98.69.202.175 (talk) 05:10, 3 January 2011 (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.