Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucy Hannah (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:41, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Lucy Hannah
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:V, as no sources can be found on her despite being the third oldest person to live. One source used is a her social security death record (which would state she is dead, link no longer works) and the other source used goes into no significant detail on her and states "her claim to age 118 did not gather much attention" so it's extremely unlikely any offline sources will exist. Article has had little improvement in over 5 years and is unlikely to ever improve due to the fact that sources simply do not exist. If you remove the unsourced information about her life, you are left with nothing that isn't already available in List of the verified oldest people and other longevity articles. CommanderLinx (talk) 14:21, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Commanderlinx, ever since you have stated, that the GRG is the reliable source for list aricles, you must understand, that this also applies for articles for remarkable individual people. Mrs. Lucy Hannah is definitely notable and deserves her own Wikipedia article. She has achieved 117 years of age, which makes her one of the 5 oldest people ever. In other words, in the documented history, only 4 other people managed to reach that extraordinary age. What is more, she holds notable records of longevity. Not only she is the oldest ever verified black person, but also she is the longevity recordholder of the state of Michigan.

The sources for the article have been updated. The GRG citation has been added, which makes her notability unquestionable. The Gerontology Research Group is the world's leading authority in extreme longevity tracking and supercentenarian study. Mrs. Hannah, as one of the oldest verified people in history, is included in every elaboration on the very oldest people developed by the GRG.

It is unfair to nominate an article for deletion and pose an argument, that "the article is unlikely to ever improve". That way of thinking we should remove thousands of other important articles, which hasn't improved in the last few years. That would be irrational. Among the goals of Wikipedia is to educate the society. The article on Lucy Hannah fulfills this goal in respect of how long can people live.Waenceslaus (talk) 19:06, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply - How does a mention in a GRG table help establish notability? According to the WP:WOP, a GRG citation cannot be used to state records held. CommanderLinx (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Because the GRG is a reliable source which verifies the age of supercentenarians. WP:GNG requires "coverage in reliable sources" but that doesn't have to mean news articles. Do you seriously not think that the third oldest person ever is worthy of note? -- Ollie231213 (talk) 13:45, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to List_of_the_verified_oldest_people. I just don't see that there is enough about her for a stand-alone article. LaMona (talk) 01:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Strong keep She was, at the time of her death, second longest-lived person in history behind Jeanne Calment, as well as oldest American ever. and even now, she is the world's third oldest person ever. I think there is no need to delete this article.--Inception2010 (talk) 10:00, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Inception2010, articles are only kept if there are sufficient reliable sources that can be cited. See WP:NOTABILITY. This article has only one source that meets that definition, the Robert Young book, and in that she is only mentioned in a footnote (while others get multiple pages). The listing in the Gerontology Research Group is just a listing in a table. Neither of these establishes notability under WP's requirements. LaMona (talk) 15:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG states: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Reliable sources don't have to be news articles. The Gerontology Research Group is a reliable source, contrary to what you say. That she is "just listed in a table" doesn't mean that her notability is in question. This isn't someone like Kim Kardashian who is just famous for being famous, this is someone who is notable for their longevity. Such people do not always receive attention from the media, but that doesn't make their feats of longevity any less notable. The issue here is the lack of biographical information. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 17:21, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Reply - No. The issue here is she is not notable because there is no "significant coverage" in reliable sources. A mention in a footnote, a listing in a table and an SSDI (which isn't reliable under WP:OR anyway) do not demonstrate "significant coverage" or that she is notable. CommanderLinx (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * We could redirect this information to the List of supercentenarians from the United States as Ollie231213 has pointed out. Longevitydude (talk) 02:44, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge with List of supercentenarians from the United States. As I have explained above, I don't believe her notability to be in question. The issue here is whether or not the content and sourcing is sufficient enough to justify a stand alone article. I believe that, if the article is not kept, a mini biography should be created in |this sub-section of the article on American supercentenarians. As the third oldest person ever, it's possible that a news story about her could be published in the future. Even if not, details about the records she has held can still be included in a mini biography. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 17:29, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Ollie231213, the article on Lucy Hannah is the article on the notable person, one of the oldest ever recorded in history and verified by the Gerontology Research Group. She has articles in other languages as well. Redirecting = Deletion. Such action would cause the article being non-existent, which is not desirable, because this would be an impoverishment of English Wikipedia. I am convinced to protect the important biographical article on English Wikipedia, which has the greatest number of articles and they are of the best quality. How can an article exist on other language versions of Wikipedia, while it wouldn't exist on the English version? CommanderLinx, your actions are destructive. You constantly nominate articles for deletion one after another from the English Wikipedia. I can't allow such action being continued. I please you to refrain from it for the sake of the quality of English Wikipedia. Otherwise, I will be forced to report this to ANI. Consider this as a warning. Sincerely, Waenceslaus (talk) 12:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - WP:OTHERLANGS is not a valid reason for keeping this article. CommanderLinx (talk) 15:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Keep She lived to be 117, she was the oldest person never to become WOP. She was the oldest person in America and the verified oldest African American ever. Longevitydude (talk) 02:40, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * These reasons are all useless without reliable sources. Nothing that isn't already present in List of supercentenarians from the United States anyway. CommanderLinx (talk) 15:05, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment I've changed my original vote to "keep or merge" rather than "keep or redirect" as I was confusing the two. I think that the article should be kept or if not, some of the content added to List of supercentenarians from the United States. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 13:37, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that even if the article doesn't stand alone, it should still be part of the List of supercentenarians from the United States article, that way the biography will still exist. Longevitydude (talk) 23:58, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment Ollie231213, Longevitydude, Redirecting or merging the article with another one, which is a list article is not the rational option. Firstly, Lucy Hannah has article on other Wikipedias than just the English one. It would not look good, when English Wikipedia, which is the most popular one, would miss the important biographical article on the very notable person, whom Lucy Hannah is. Secondly, list articles and biographical articles should not be merged, for the sake of maintainment of basic order. Eventually, more and more information would be transported to the list article, which would inevitably result in the lack of order of its content. What is more, there is a risk of losing important information from the biographical article, which currently is well sourced and should be left untouched. Finally, the article has been already nominated for deletion once and the result was keep. Since that time, the article has been expanded, new valuable and reliable sources and citations have been provided. Therefore I can see no reason for deleting/redirecting/merging of the article and the only rational option is KEEP.Waenceslaus (talk) 10:59, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment - Again, WP:OTHERLANGS is not a valid reason for keeping this article. The previous AFD was closed over seven years ago and there hasn't been much (if any) improvement. As stated in the article, she escaped media notice which means sourcing is unlikely to improve beyond mentions in GRG list. The unsourced information about her early life needs to be removed and you're left with a name, age and country. Merging the article to say List of supercentenarians from the United States results in no loss of info. CommanderLinx (talk) 11:47, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Keep Lucy Hannah is the oldest African-American-person ever as well as the second oldest American of all time. CommanderLinx you are the only person who does these totally unnecessary nominations for deletion regarding supercentenarians and I wonder why you are so opposed to people learning about them? 930310 (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect or Merge to List of supercentenarians from the United States. Absolutely nothing substantitive to justify a stand-alone article once all the unreferenced material is removed (as it should be). Currently contains 3 references (one is merely membership of a list; one fails WP:PRIMARYand OR and contradicts the information in the article; and another presents little more than doubt over her age)  none of which are independent of the subject thereby failing SIGCOV. Contains less material then many of those included in List of supercentenarians from the United States.  DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 10:55, 21 June 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.