Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margaret Arlene Payne


 * 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   redirect to Family of Barack Obama. There are several valid concerns that family relationship to an important figure usually does not confer notability (and in this case it is an extended family), and there is a clear consensus that there should not be a separate article. On the question on whether the content should be merged there is no consensus, so I will not delete this outright. Since the subject already has a paragraph in the "Family of Barack Obama" article I will redirect there without further changes. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Margaret Arlene Payne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No proof of notability other than an obituary and Obama being mentioned very late in her obituary. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Redtigerxyz Talk 07:42, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. WP:NOTINHERITED. Xxanthippe (talk) 08:07, 26 June 2014 (UTC).
 * Comment - A Charlotte Observer story with depth of coverage like this is certainly a valid piece of evidence of notability, whatever the reason for it. A second piece is needed to prove it, though.  Payne's academic work doesn't appear to be widely cited, so that doesn't help. If, however, some pre-death coverage can be found - or an obit in another major newspaper - then Payne is notable.  --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:00, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - her death was noted briefly here, here, there, there, sidewards glancing yonder, and hey looka yondah. Much of the recent media attention to Payne was perhaps due to how her obit referred, in tongue in cheek fashion, to her relationship to the President, how she wasn't one to brag. I'm always amazed how some persons refer to Obama's family as if he comes from absolutely nobodies, the wrong side of the tracks, or Galilee, or some other unlikely place, or if one purrfers, Kenya.  In fact, both his parents had Ph.D.s, as did, yes, the subject of this stub.  Payne has some claim to notability in her own right - see this book. Bearian (talk) 17:58, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * She may deserve an entry in Obama's family, but does she deserve a stand-alone article? The whole ruckus was about the obituary. WP:SINGLEEVENT applies. WP:GNG "Significant coverage" is violated. There is no proof of WP:NACADEMICS being complied with. Authoring a book on children's nutrition doesn't make her notable. Redtigerxyz Talk 18:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * O.K., I see the other arguments, in particular User:TonyTheTiger's, supra. I'd go along with a merge. Bearian (talk) 21:22, 16 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Maya Soetoro-Ng's academic achievements are roughly similar to Margaret Payne's, and she has an article, with all the independent sources being Obama-related. While Payne does not meet WP:PROF by today's standards, it must have been quite an achievement for a woman born in 1927 to earn a PhD in her time, especially if it was a PhD in statistics from the University of Chicago. FireflySixtySeven (talk) 13:14, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Again WP:NOTINHERITED. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:49, 28 June 2014 (UTC).
 * Not at all. If she'd earned it in 1927 then it would have been relatively unusual, but there were plenty of women with PhDs by the time she got hers. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:46, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete The academic notability rules are not time sensitive. Either she meets one of the clear criteria or she does not. Writting one book in most subjects does not make someone notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  07:28, 3 July 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Delete I really want to find a reason to support this. However, anyone can have an obit. WP:GNG is about a subject having editorial content apart from passing mentions. Although an obit is not a passing mention, it is not really content based on editorial choice that it was worthy of space. An obit is almost a mandatory mention. Discarding all obit and related content it is difficult to support notability. Having a book published does not confer notability unless the book meets certain standards of import. I just don't see a policy based reason to claim uninherited notability for this subject.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:33, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - If it is decided Payne is non-notable, please consider a merge to Family of Barack Obama instead of a deletion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 17:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:50, 13 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge In my opinion deletion nomination was not the appropriate action to be taken here. Merging with Family of Barack Obama should've been what was proposed. JTdale   Talk 09:21, 13 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete per above arguments. The article itself implicitly asserts WP:INHERIT notability. Agricola44 (talk) 15:34, 16 July 2014 (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.