Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jennifer Bricker


 * 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The result was   nomination withdrawn. Jenks24 (talk) 10:14, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Jennifer Bricker

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Removed prod. While her story is inspiring, I can find nothing that suggests notability not connected with her sister. Notability is not inherited. Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:ATHLETE. Trusilver 07:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Taking the St. Louis Tribune source into account, as well as the rather unique circumstances of the subject, I'm going to retract my position and withdrawal this RfA. Trusilver  20:17, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * keep or merge . Yes notability not inherited, but the story is a significant and clearly notable part to the bio of Dominique Moceanu. A separate article may be questioned, but the content cleary belongs to wikipedia. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:18, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Changed to definite "keep", after some diligence of research. Staszek Lem (talk) 19:54, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I still fail to see anything that would suggest she has stand-alone notability. My interest was piqued at the reference to her placing fourth in the Junior Olympics. After doing a little more digging I found that she competed not in the national-level AAU Junior Olympics, but rather the regional Illinois Junior Olympics. Whereas WP:ATHLETE states that at the international-level Youth Olympic Games an athlete must medal to be deemed notable. The subject falls very short of this benchmark. You agreed that notability is not inherited, yet this would be CSD territory if not for the subject having a notable sister. And for the record and the sake of satisfying my own curiosity, I looked up fifteen random medalists in the AAU Junior Olympics (which I stress again, was above the competition the subject competed in), and none of those fifteen have Wikipedia articles. Trusilver  02:33, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Notability guidelines are ..er.. guidelines, to save time for typical arguments. This is an exceptional story here, about a person as a whole, not just a random athlete. So, what we have here so far:
 * Multiple independent coverage from major media
 * Verifiable information, including a chapter in a book
 * A person without legs competes against regular ones and places high on national level
 * P.S. This ref says it was actually 1988 AAU JO, not IL JO. I will dig further. (confirmed from 1998 source)
 * U.S. Tumbling Association’s Inspiration Award
 * Adoption mystery drama
 * Notable sister
 * Of course, each of these arguments, if taken alone, is easily defeatable, but taken nogether, it is my opinion they render the article deserving. Staszek Lem (talk) 15:59, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been hunting for some kind of authoritative source on the level she competed at, and keep getting conflicting stories. I think that in her case we are looking at a journalistic version of the telephone game where each source is using the one before it as the basis for their story and over time certain facts have been misrepresented. I'm still hunting. If I can find some evidence that she actually did compete at a national level, I will withdrawal the AfD. In the case of conflicting stories, my opinion is the highest circulation source wins. (i.e. NY Times always trumps the BFE Local Tribune and Fishing Report) Trusilver  16:24, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I know what you are talking about. I believe I've found and added a credible source, dated 1998, i.e., the very year of the event. It is understandable that 2012 got chinese whispers. Power to wikipedia!Staszek Lem (talk) 17:03, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That works for me. Nice job finding that source. Trusilver  20:17, 9 August 2012 (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.