Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Millie Lawson Bethell Paxton


 * 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. A clear consensus for keep based on the presence of the subject's entry in the Dictionary of Virginia Biography. (non-admin closure)   scope_creep Talk  13:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Millie Lawson Bethell Paxton

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Prod was deleted with edit summary “decline, subject is very likely notable”. Very likely notable is not the same as they are notable. There is absolutely no evidence presented that she is notable and despite what other editors have said, what I care about is that the article presents a minimal amount of evidence that they are Wiki Worthy. An article can always be improved and more resources found but at least say this person is notable because.... and then leave it to others to expand. This article doesn’t even do that. ThurstonMitchell (talk) 19:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:38, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep: Simply reading ref 1 indicates this person's notability, though not much of this is yet reflected in the article. I've added obit quotes as a summary of her life. Plenty more material is available. Pam D  21:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note that some careless writing had led to careless removal of paragraph about her main work - an editor didn't guess "put" to be a typo for "but" so removed para as incomprehensible. Pam D   22:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment again, you should not have to go to a reference to assess notability. How lazy must someone be not to put in one or two sentences saying this person is known for x y or z?  And my edit removing an incomprehensible sentence was not careless.  What was careless was not proofreading before you posted something.  I had to make numerous corrections for poor punctuation.  It is not my place or anyone else’s job to try to figure out what you were trying to say. If you didn’t catch a mistake before you hit submit, then don’t leave until you read what you published and fix any mistakes you catch.  Then perhaps people won’t feel the need to delete things that don’t make any sense.  And you are always free to add information back in that you think was deleted and should not have been, as long as you write in clearly with no punctuation, grammar or spelling mistakes.  ThurstonMitchell (talk) 23:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
 * WP:BEFORE might well start with looking at the references. Pam  D  07:49, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The article needs work, but per WP:ANYBIO, she "has an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography or similar publication," i.e. Dictionary of Virginia Biography. And I have been going in circles on this website (e.g. she is included in a list of "Black Women Suffragists", Alexander Street/ProQuest), but it appears possible that additional sources exist. Beccaynr (talk) 00:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC) As an update, the article has been revised and the addition of news sources has begun, e.g. in 1954, she was still receiving coverage for her civic leadership; I've been using a Virginia newspaper database, and more sources are available. Beccaynr (talk) 18:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep She's got an entry in a state dictionary of biography. I use the equivalent one for North Carolina (NCPedia) all the time. That's as good a source as it gets and usually indicates more sources are to be found. -Indy beetle (talk) 01:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. Beccaynr (talk) 03:46, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep meets WP:ANYBIO as per Dictionary of Virginia Biography entry, makes it virtually definite other sources exist Eddie891 Talk Work 13:30, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - The Dictionary of Virginia Biography does not fall into WP:ANYBIO's Dictionary of National Biography or similar publication. The former's purpose is to preserve and provide access to the state's incomparable printed and manuscript holdings, i.e. entry is dependent on being mentioned in historical documents. Entry in the Dictionary of National Biography is selective and there is a process to ensure the subject is notable. An entry in the Dictionary of Virginia Biography only shows they existed, not that they are notable. --John B123 (talk) 19:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I would agree with the statement that a state dictionary of bio is not the same as a national one, but it's not as if the Virginia dictionary is indiscriminate in who it decides to write an article on. I doubt they are writing articles on every Virginian who is merely mentioned ("exists") in their historical archive. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The Dictionary of Virginia gave her a biography, it not just brief mention. It reads: At her death a Virginia newspaper described her as "one of Roanoke's most widely known and beloved colored citizens," active "in all phases of civic and religious work.".  So they saw her as quite important, a well known figure in her state.   D r e a m Focus  00:20, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per above, there is enough to meet WP:ANYBIO. VocalIndia (talk) 06:56, 27 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.