Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lizbeth Robles


 * 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 delete. As always source analysis wins over hopefulness and non policy based arguments Spartaz Humbug! 13:44, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Lizbeth Robles

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:SOLDIER (SPC with no significant decorations) and lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS to satisfy WP:GNG. The first female Puerto Rican to die in Operation Iraqi Freedom (vehicle accident, not combat) is not notable. Mztourist (talk) 03:54, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 03:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 03:57, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - Being the first Puerto Rican female to die in combat while serving our country may not be notable for some, but it is notable for us Puerto Ricans. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * She didn't die in combat, she died in a vehicle accident. The page says "when they had an accident and the vehicle flipped over", so why did you revert my edit and restore the false claim that she died in combat? Mztourist (talk) 05:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 04:15, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep - Agree. Lots of officers have died in accidents -- General George S. Patton, etc.  Lots of Iraq War accidents just from aircraft -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_accidents_and_incidents_in_Iraq_War "A third of U.S. military injuries in Iraq, Afghanistan not from battle, Reuters ...  about 34 percent of injuries were not sustained in battle. Injuries off the battlefield often involved motor vehicle crashes; other incidents involved operating machinery or playing sports..." Durindaljb (talk) 07:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * So? What is your policy-based argument for keeping this page? There is a big difference between dying in combat and dying in a combat zone. Mztourist (talk) 08:24, 21 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:SOLDIER is an unofficial essay which lacks consensus and so is not a valid reason to delete. It is easy to find sources for the subject such as this book which provides coverage prior to her untimely death, "Typical of the new recruits is Lizbeth Robles. Although not from Hartford, her story exemplifies that of many youth who are. A young Puerto Rican woman from a working-class family, Lizbeth was active in her church, did ..."  This demonstrates that WP:BEFORE has not been followed, that the topic has potential per WP:NEXIST and so our policy WP:ATD applies, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page." Andrew🐉(talk) 11:59, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * As you keep making the same comment about SOLDIER I will keep making the same rebuttal, it is MilHist consensus until the discussion closes. Finding one passing reference does not prove that BEFORE hasn't been followed, I did see that in the Books search but didn't regard it as in any way significant. There isn't SIGCOV of her in multiple RS. Mztourist (talk) 15:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:SOLDIER now states "The notability guidance previously provided by the WP:SOLDIER essay has been deprecated as a result of this discussion. It is no longer considered by WikiProject Military history to be useful guidance on the notability of military people, and its use in deletion discussions is actively discouraged by the project." Q.E.D. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:16, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes it has been deprecated since this AFD was opened, but it was never the sole basis of this AFD, which also referred to GNG. Mztourist (talk) 16:45, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * The subject passes WP:GNG as there is WP:SIGCOV as demonstrated. My !vote stands. Andrew🐉(talk) 16:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment - U|Mztourist you want to know the difference between both female soldiers? 1. SPC Frances M. Vega was born in San Francisco, California and was the first female soldier of Puerto Rican descent to die in a combat zone. A surface-to-air missile was fired by insurgents in Al Fallujah and it hit the U.S. transport helicopter (Chinook) which Vega was in. She was one of 16 soldiers who lost their lives in the crash that followed. 2. SPC Lizbeth Robles was born in Vega Baja, Puerto Rico and was the first female soldier born in Puerto Rico to die in the War on Terrorism. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:13, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment on Frances M. Vega (died 2 November 2003) you claim that she was "the first female soldier of Puerto Rican descent to have died in a war zone" and here you claim that Robles (died 1 March 2005) was "the first Puerto Rican female soldier to die in combat" so which is it? Vega was on a helicopter that was shot down, which sounds a lot more like combat than Robles who died in a vehicle accident. Mztourist (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I assume that "Puerto Rican descent" is different as Frances M. Vega was born in San Francisco, California, went to high school in Puerto Rico, and is buried in Puerto Rico. The article does not appear to describe her family. Durindaljb (talk) 20:14, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * so the difference is Puerto Rican descent vs born in Puerto Rico? That is about the most tenuous basis for a claim of notability I have ever seen. I realise that you want lots of pages about Puerto Rican "heroes" but this is too much. Mztourist (talk) 02:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * That is your opinion. There is a difference since Puerto Ricans have a Puerto Rican citizenship and a limited American citizenship. That it is about the most tenuous basis for a claim of notability that you have ever seen, again that is your opinion. Yes, I have written about Puerto Rican heroes, because they deserve it and I for one am a proud Puerto Rican and American who wants the world to know that we, the Puerto Ricans, as a people have made positive contributions to our nation even it meant sacrificing our lives in doing so. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:12, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Which is fine if WP:GNG is met, but on too many of your pages it clearly isn't. Mztourist (talk) 03:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Comment - According to Jorge Mariscal, writing for CounterPunch, "The story of Lizbeth Robles teaches us much about young women in today’s “volunteer” army," including because "Although women are not technically given combat arms occupations, assignments such as that of Robles account for many of the killed and wounded," and "Despite the harsh realities for women in the military, some like Lizbeth Robles decide to make the military their career."
 * Redirect to Puerto Rican women in the military Pretty much every state/territory has a first man/woman killed in Iraq/Afghanistan/wherever, and this is not basis for notability. Sources are not adequate biographical coverage. Reywas92Talk 20:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect Support the redirect, not much notability otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 20:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Per WP:RSP, there is currently no consensus on if CounterPunch is a reliable source. TJMSmith (talk) 15:09, 22 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails in my view to meet GNG. Similar to too many other poorly-sourced articles claiming notability for one very specific reason. Intothatdarkness 02:49, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO1E, and WP:NOTMEMORIAL. The book coverage is brief (few sentences). The Denver Post content (obituary) doesn't contain much biographic content. The other sources are primary or not reliable. The award/decoration section is currently unsourced. Where is the citation for the claim "first Puerto Rican female soldier to die in combat when she perished during Operation Iraqi Freedom"? TJMSmith (talk) 18:38, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is not a memorial and this appears to be a case of WP:BIO1E. I would support a redirect and mention in Puerto Rican women in the military if a little more reliable sourcing could be found. Best, GPL93 (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - has enough sourcing to warrant an article. Additionally, WP needs articles about woman and people of color, we should not be trying to delete this, especially with such grey-area technicalities as an excuse. - wolf  16:25, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Just to be clear, had she not died, her career was ho-hum routine. I'm not sure her death makes it that much more important. Oaktree b (talk) 17:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:GNG, specifically WP:SIGCOV - simply has not received enough coverage in secondary sources to pass our notability threshold. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:46, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep a notable soldier, similar to Nichola Goddard and María Inés Ortiz.--RZuo (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment And those look like more memorial pages as well. Intothatdarkness 15:19, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Was going to close but new sources added to article, and unhelpfully not listed here. Can we have some detailed source analysis here please?
 * Keep - I found more reliable sourcing and added to the article. She is a notable soldier with coverage in Reliable Sources.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 03:35, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The new sources look like more namechecks to me, not unlike what we've seen with other articles recently added to AFD. Nothing that, in my view, meets GNG or establishes notability. In short, nothing that would lead me to change my !vote. Intothatdarkness 14:36, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment per Spartaz's comment in the relist, none of the new sources look to do anything other than list her name. I don't see any new WP:SIGCOV, the only SIGCOV that's been brought up in this conversation by anyone wanting to keep the article is Andrew Davidson's book source and even that is arguable. I am still a firm delete on GNG/NOTMEMORIAL grounds. SportingFlyer  T · C  17:36, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree with Intothatdarkness and SportingFlyer, sources are namechecks only which add nothing, page still lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS necessary to pass GNG. Mztourist (talk) 10:20, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: I think the first three sources mentioned can be considered together to meet BASIC (see below). Here is a source table.
 * {| class="wikitable"

! Source !! Evaluation
 * lko-Bauer, Barbara; Whiteford, Linda M.;… || Does mention the name and have some details. Giving this the benefit of the doubt it might be SIGCOV, but it is debatable. I added the page numbers to the reference (note: this equals about one paragraph worth of content. 13:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC))
 * lón Dávila, Javier. "APASIONADA DE LA MI… || El Nuevo Día is a significant news source and this does have non-trival coverage. I think people should look at this for possible SIGCOV
 * riscal, Jorge (January 24, 2006). "Bush'… || I think people should look at this for possible SIGCOV
 * zbeth Robles Obituary - (2005) - Vega Ba… || This is an obit. No idea who wrote it, it is a source for basic facts, but since the author is unknown it is unknown if it is IS
 * mp up to:a b "The Fallen: 2005". The New… || List of fallen soldiers; database style information
 * llen Heroes Memorial[unreliable source?]… || Memorial site, Not SIGCOV, unknown editorial oversight
 * orces: U.S. & Coalition/Casualties - Spe… || List of fallen soldiers; database style information
 * War's realities hit home again". The Den… || Brief coverage in DENVER POST. Not SIGCOV by itself
 * ang, Hyoung (March 29, 2005). "FORT CARS… || Getty images, not SIGCOV
 * MVEE CRASH KILLS SOLDIER WITH FLORIDA TI… || Article about the solder she died with, mentions her name. I updated the link to newspapers.com since the orginal was just to the site and the article wasn't archived.
 * rkan, Ross (2005-10-18). "2,000 Troops D… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * BC News Honors U.S. Casualties". ABC New… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * S. Casualties Announced By The Dept. of… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * peration Iraqi Freedom". Valor Run. 2001… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * erto Rico National Cemetery - Bayamón". … || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * hemical Regiment remembers fallen with O… || Name listed in article about monument dedication ceremony
 * }
 * The second source profiled over sixty different fallen Puerto Rican soldiers. It's honestly very sad - I read several of them - but I don't see it lending itself to notability. The third source accepts reader submitted articles so has self publication issues. I cannot access the first source apart from the index, but we're still clearly short of WP:GNG as your table shows. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Reply:, its borderline on sources, the author of the third piece is a Professor of Literature and Chicano Studies at UC San Diego, so I think it carries weight. I don't see why the number of articles written by the second source impacts the source for this subject. I found the first source (can't post it), its borderline, the weakest of the three. You are right the rest are just to puff up the article.  // Timothy :: talk  20:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * My issue with the second article is that's not discriminate about who it was covering. If she were the only person featured it'd be a very strong source, otherwise it would make ~60 people borderline notable. The third one probably isn't unreliable but it doesn't make it not self-published, especially since it looks like the author cross-posted the link on their blog. It's not enough for me to think this is worth keeping. SportingFlyer  T · C  20:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * TimothyBlue thanks, but your table clearly shows that there isn't SIGCOV in multiple RS necessary to satisfy GNG. Mztourist (talk)
 * Switch to Delete: and  are more right than wrong about the sources, I made the best argument I could (which I knew was a weak one, from my own comments) and returned to see if I had convinced anyone. I thought a rename could deal with WP:BIO1E issue but without the sources, it cannot be overcome. So based on a lack of SIGCOV and 1E, I'll switch to Delete. The keep votes haven't provided anything based in sources and guidelines to work with (other than what I have in the source table above) and don't address the 1E problem. Note to closer: let me know if you'd like me to count the words from the first source (book).
 * If there is a consensus on a redirect target, I would support a redirect. (comment added 13:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC))  // Timothy :: talk  13:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * BC News Honors U.S. Casualties". ABC New… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * S. Casualties Announced By The Dept. of… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * peration Iraqi Freedom". Valor Run. 2001… || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * erto Rico National Cemetery - Bayamón". … || Memorial listing, no SIGCOV
 * hemical Regiment remembers fallen with O… || Name listed in article about monument dedication ceremony
 * }
 * The second source profiled over sixty different fallen Puerto Rican soldiers. It's honestly very sad - I read several of them - but I don't see it lending itself to notability. The third source accepts reader submitted articles so has self publication issues. I cannot access the first source apart from the index, but we're still clearly short of WP:GNG as your table shows. SportingFlyer  T · C  18:55, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Reply:, its borderline on sources, the author of the third piece is a Professor of Literature and Chicano Studies at UC San Diego, so I think it carries weight. I don't see why the number of articles written by the second source impacts the source for this subject. I found the first source (can't post it), its borderline, the weakest of the three. You are right the rest are just to puff up the article.  // Timothy :: talk  20:31, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * My issue with the second article is that's not discriminate about who it was covering. If she were the only person featured it'd be a very strong source, otherwise it would make ~60 people borderline notable. The third one probably isn't unreliable but it doesn't make it not self-published, especially since it looks like the author cross-posted the link on their blog. It's not enough for me to think this is worth keeping. SportingFlyer  T · C  20:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * TimothyBlue thanks, but your table clearly shows that there isn't SIGCOV in multiple RS necessary to satisfy GNG. Mztourist (talk)
 * Switch to Delete: and  are more right than wrong about the sources, I made the best argument I could (which I knew was a weak one, from my own comments) and returned to see if I had convinced anyone. I thought a rename could deal with WP:BIO1E issue but without the sources, it cannot be overcome. So based on a lack of SIGCOV and 1E, I'll switch to Delete. The keep votes haven't provided anything based in sources and guidelines to work with (other than what I have in the source table above) and don't address the 1E problem. Note to closer: let me know if you'd like me to count the words from the first source (book).
 * If there is a consensus on a redirect target, I would support a redirect. (comment added 13:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC))  // Timothy :: talk  13:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * My issue with the second article is that's not discriminate about who it was covering. If she were the only person featured it'd be a very strong source, otherwise it would make ~60 people borderline notable. The third one probably isn't unreliable but it doesn't make it not self-published, especially since it looks like the author cross-posted the link on their blog. It's not enough for me to think this is worth keeping. SportingFlyer  T · C  20:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)
 * TimothyBlue thanks, but your table clearly shows that there isn't SIGCOV in multiple RS necessary to satisfy GNG. Mztourist (talk)
 * Switch to Delete: and  are more right than wrong about the sources, I made the best argument I could (which I knew was a weak one, from my own comments) and returned to see if I had convinced anyone. I thought a rename could deal with WP:BIO1E issue but without the sources, it cannot be overcome. So based on a lack of SIGCOV and 1E, I'll switch to Delete. The keep votes haven't provided anything based in sources and guidelines to work with (other than what I have in the source table above) and don't address the 1E problem. Note to closer: let me know if you'd like me to count the words from the first source (book).
 * If there is a consensus on a redirect target, I would support a redirect. (comment added 13:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC))  // Timothy :: talk  13:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep despite the argument about sources above, cannot see why to delete ratheer than per Andrew rather than improve per wolf  due to the notability of her death in combat service, her race, gender make combined case of GNG, cited in them all per The Eloquent Peasant . Alternative the article could be renamed 'the death of Lizbeth Robles' per Tony the Marine and discuss issue of accident versus combat, find sources for decorations. Kaybeesquared (talk) 23:23, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Considering race and gender in any way as a factor to ignore notability guidelines and lack of sourcingc is by far the worst suggestion I've heard at AfD.  // Timothy :: talk  00:19, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - I voted Keep in the first round and my vote is still keep. I think it's important to keep the article as she was the first Puerto Rican woman to die in a war zone and the Connecticut General Assembly used her in the context of Hispanic-Americans fighting for the US. I added another  "new" cite, that she's mentioned when considering the loss of life by Hispanic-American soldiers... "In 2007, the Connecticut General Assembly was reminded that Robles was the first Puerto Rican woman to die in a war zone because "According to the Pew Hispanic Center, while Latinos make up 9.5% of the actively enlisted forces, they are over represented in the categories that get the most dangerous assignments, infantry, gun crews, and seamanship, and make up over 17.5% of the front lines." I added sources that I thought would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Eloquent Peasant (talk • contribs) 01:42, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , IMO, it makes sense to mention Robles and possibly create a redirect to the Military history of Puerto Rico and/or Hispanic and Latino Americans. I haven't seen the in-depth or sustained coverage of Robles I would expect to meet notability requirements for an independent article. I still think this looks like a case of WP:NOTMEMORIAL. TJMSmith (talk) 02:23, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: If there is a consensus on a redirect target, I would support a redirect. I've added this to my above !vote.  // Timothy :: talk  13:33, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete lack of military impact and reliable sources Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:25, 14 March 2021 (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.