Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linda Coombs


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:29, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Linda Coombs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Seems like a competent, but ordinary curator. Has "too many" occupations in first line, suggesting editor is stretching to make a case for notability. Being a Native American tribal member is not notable in itself. Nor is being an author, historian or artist, taken alone. A person must be more noted than most people in one of those fields. The article seems to say she is notable because she presents Native American material, but doesn't claim to be "one of the best" in that field either. Note that this does not claim to be a stub. It may be the maximum article that can ever be written about this person. Recommend deletion. Student7 (talk) 23:05, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * First draft was admittedly poorly resourced. Coombs is well-known among museum officials, educators, and professors of Native American Studies in the New England area.  Hopefully the added references help indicate that she is *the* go-to person on Wampanoag history and culture.Ssenier (talk) 00:35, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  23:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  23:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  23:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep I see coverage in CNN, the Boston Globe, the Boca Raton News, the Providence Journal, ABC News, the Christian Science Monitor, the Boston Herald and the Morning Call. She is mentioned 14 times in a book called The Wampanoag Tribe of Martha's Vineyard: Colonization to Recognition. A book called Squanto's Journey: The Story of the First Thanksgiving describes her as a "prominent Wampanoag scholar and defender of their nation's traditions". Many other books quote her and cite her work. She passes the general notability guideline, in my judgment.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  02:41, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - "A person must be more noted than most people in one of those fields...." This is absolutely false. If that were the case, then we would only be able to keep a few articles on musicians, a few on doctors and professors, and a few for all other fields of work. I do not want to be around to watch you try to sort our which authors you believe should be kept and which ones you believe should be deleted. While the article needs some major clean up, that doesn't mean it needs deleted. Based on the sources show above by Cullen328, there is more than enough to meet WP:GNG. The rest is all formatting and re-wording the article according to the available references. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 21:16, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - Has not received Significant coverage. --Hirolovesswords (talk) 21:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability has been established by multiple published, secondary sources. -Uyvsdi (talk) 02:24, 1 May 2013 (UTC)Uyvsdi
 * Keep - Doesn't seem deletable, has too many sources establishing notability. Til Eulenspiegel /talk/ 12:40, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Weak keep -- She seems to have some academic prominence, but not an enormous body of work. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:43, 2 May 2013 (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.