Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martha Dilys Buckley-Jones (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 no consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 03:45, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

Martha Dilys Buckley-Jones
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Last AfD was in 2013. Fails WP:BIO. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Searches only found routine mentions confirming she is ambassador but nothing in depth. LibStar (talk) 04:33, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  11:59, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Canada,  and Guatemala.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:40, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Africa and Trinidad and Tobago.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:42, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete ambassadors are not default notable, and the sourcing is not enough to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:37, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I have started adding in coverage of her work, which covers multiple countries and languages. As of now, the additions are single sentences, but I will expand them to a more coherent set of statements as time allows. If others are interested in searching for sources, she is easily found in the news as Dilys Buckley-Jones. DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:26, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Change to weak keep - the 1967 article in the Calgary Herald is an entire article about her. I believe that news article and the many shorter mentions are barely enough for a keep. DaffodilOcean (talk) 18:13, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep per WP:HEY. Seventeen references have been added, and article has been expanded since nomination - the 1967 article is quite in-depth, along with the 1984 G&M article. Nfitz (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2022 (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.