Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pia Ednie-Brown


 * 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   delete. As there have been no reliable sources presented covering the subject directly and in detail, the article's subject is found to not be notable. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:53, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Pia Ednie-Brown

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject of the article fails WP:GNG and the professor test. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 08:08, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep I believe the text content demonstrates that the subject meets WP:GNG and with the professor test. Sources that have been added are reliable but have only been listed as web addresses- need to include more detail about these sources. More cross referencing and links to external pages could help prove her validity in relation to these concerns Alysiab (talk) 12:36, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, article contents does not demonstrates the notability of a subject. Articles are included in the encyclopedia on the basis of notability not on the basis of the article content. While you familiarize with basics policy before leaving a vote or comments at AfD, you may consider to read WP:GNG, WP:ACADEMIC and WP:RS. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 13:11, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Question: Which part of WP:PROF do you think she meets, Alysiab? -- Sam Sailor Talk! 22:45, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Answer: Thank you and apologies for not clarifying this above User:Sam Sailor] Sam Sailor], I'm very new to wikipedia editing. I think she is particularly notable in respect to Criteria 9 in as she meets most of the notability standards for [[WP:CREATIVE, as evident it the large body of academic output listed on the page, a particularly prolific output for the field of architecture. If you need further clarification, please let me know. Alysiab (talk) 05:01, 19 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Note to closing admin: also left the above keep argument word-for-word at Articles_for_deletion/Sandra_kaji-o%27grady. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 13:38, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * delete fails WP:ACADEMIC. no third party sources, no major awards, no significant peer recognition. LibStar (talk) 15:20, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak delete: While this person may be notable, the sources present in the article don't back that up. In particular, none of the listed sources seem independent of the subject. If better sources were added, this article could probably be kept. {&#123; Nihiltres &#124;talk&#124;edits}&#125; 19:18, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

— Janecaught (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Keep I started the topic; a first time contributor. A group of us (all first time contributors bar one) got together as there were less than 10 female Australian architects listed on Wikipedia and we wanted to make wiki content more representative. Its a little unfortunate therefore that a lot of the entries we added are flagged for deletion due to being 'not notable enough' - though I understand Wikipedia has policies on this that has nothing to do with gender. We are continuing to add to the entries in question to ensure that they comply with Wikipedia policy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Janecaught (talk • contribs) 11:20, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 22:47, 15 March 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.