Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martha Choe


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 18:31, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Martha Choe

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I have serious doubts the subject meets WP:NBIO. The only possible notable achievement may be having a high rank (CAO) in a major NGO, but still, CAO is not CEO, and I don't think CAOs are auto-notable. There is some in-depth coverage, ex. in Crosscut.com, but even that one is half-interview, and that's about it - other stories about her like  seem nearly total self-authored per WP:INTERVIEW if not worse as in press releases. The Crosscut award also doesn't seem sufficient for notability. Maybe if all of those are added together, but still, this is a borderline case that would benefit from further comments from the community. Personally I don't see sufficient evidence of notability, so my nom vote is 'delete'. Thoughts? PS. The creator of this article, is indef-blocked, with a note saying that nearly a 1000 of their articles have been deleted. Not that it should prejudice us... much. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 14:32, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. You are leaving out (and the article as it stands barely mentions) her main notability. She served two terms on the 9-member Seattle City Council (and was, by the way, the first Korean American ever to serve on the council). Because the city council is only 9 people for a city of over half a million, I'd say that any elected member of the council is de facto notable (not so sure about people appointed to fill out a term who don't run for reelection, but that's not relevant here). Further, as mentioned at https://crosscut.com/2016/10/martha-choe-lifetime-achievement-2016-courage-awards, she was director of the Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (later Department of Commerce), the state-level equivalent of a cabinet position. In short: this article needs a bunch of work, but she is certainly notable. - Jmabel &#124; Talk 16:30, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * WP:NPOL does not suggest city councilors are auto-notable. Her bio is, as I said, a lot of near misses on notability. Too local / low level of a politician, executive, received awards or coverage. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 19:34, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Nor being the first Korean American to hold the office? Nor later being head of a statewide gov't department? Are you saying that even the Crosscut source I cited still doesn't bring her up to notability? - Jmabel &#124; Talk 23:25, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Crosscut.com is a good source, but it is regional so it's a fairly weak argument for notability. It would be useful to show that her work is discussed in academic or national publications.  And also to hsow that in one of her various positions she had a significant or enduring impact on something. User:Jmabel, it may be that there is notability here, but someone would have to do the work to WP:HEYMANN by showing coverage and/or impact - preferably both.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * According to https://digitalcollections.lib.washington.edu/digital/collection/ohc/id/1084, she was the first Korean American elected official in the United States! Surely that rises to the level of notability! - Jmabel &#124; Talk 00:24, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * "first" claims require great care. The Korea Times describes her as | "the first Korean American ever elected into a city council". The Korea Herald says | "the first Korean-American to be elected as a member of the City Council in Seattle." but even though the Northwest Asian Weekly says |  "She was the first Korean American official elected in the entire country." I would not personally be willing to add that to the page without a stronger source.  Reason is that very specific, very sweeping claims require very reliable, multiple sources.[[User:E.M.Gregory|E.M.Gregory] (talk) 02:50, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * *Not unless there was widespread media coverage of the fact. We have a lot of immigrant groups in the U.S., and 50 states.  So, no, the first Greek-American college president in Illinois, or the first Cuban-American city council member in Jacksonville would not be not inherently notable.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:03, 16 January 2019 (UTC) My bad.E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:33, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * You are saying that "first in the United States" is no more notable than "first in Jacksonville"? - Jmabel &#124; Talk 01:58, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:11, 15 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete the sources in the article do not meet WP:BIO/WP:GNG. City councillors do not get automatic notability grants per NPOL, though they are more likely to meet WP:GNG for larger cities. I don't care if my vote is disregarded if better sourcing is later demonstrated. SportingFlyer  T · C  19:02, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Probably Delete. City councilor in Seattle, a moderately large city, does not confer automatic notability. she has been written  up, but only in regional publications like Seattle Magazine and Northwest Asian Weekly.  I don't think it's quite enough. E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:39, 15 January 2019 (UTC). withdrawing to allow time for a closer look at sources.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:48, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. searches on "Martha Choe" + "first korean" bring up WP:RS articles from which a decent article can be built.E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:36, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. The recent additions by Peaceray and Jmabel make it pretty clear that Choe meets the notability requirement.--ragesoss (talk) 02:56, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep based on WP:POLOUTCOMES, specifically the national press coverage point.  Sounder Bruce  06:19, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. I believe that nominating this article ignores the first tenet of Introduction to deletion process: " * Articles that are in bad shape – these can be tagged for cleanup or attention, or improved through editing." There is an Authority control, two NYT citations, a scholarly citation from MIT, federal government publications, a citation from a Brazilian journal, & wide coverage in area press. IMHO, I think that any denial of notability clearly ignores those sources & all the positions that she has held. Peaceray (talk) 07:15, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:21, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. Positions and coverage are notable, as mentioned above. LovelyLillith (talk) 01:14, 17 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep I can see how looking at the versions of this article prior to this month you'd think it looked like the resume of an obscure corporate executive, but the notability is not now obvious. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2019 (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.