Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahima Banu


 * 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. Seems like there is enough support for the article topic being independently notable to escape deletion. A merger or repurposing of the article should be discussed on the talk page. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:48, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

Rahima Banu

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject is a rather glaring case of WP:BLP1E. While there are quite a few mentions of this person there is not much that could reasonably be labeled in depth in its coverage beyond her unfortunate 1E claim to fame. I considered a merge into Smallpox but there is basically nothing to merge. She was the last known case, which is already mentioned in that article. End of story. If not deleted or redirected the article is almost certainly destined to remain a perma-stub. Ad Orientem (talk) 20:46, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - condition 3 of BLP1E is, "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. John Hinckley, Jr., for example, has a separate article because the single event he was associated with, the Reagan assassination attempt, was significant and his role was both substantial and well documented." Rahima Banu's case is a noted one in epidemiology and represented a very significant advance in human history. It isn't like wikipedia doesn't have the space to cover her life in more detail than would be possible merged into smallpox. Smmurphy(Talk) 22:33, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per . It does seem like her role in the event was significant enough, and being the last ever human sufferer of small pox is a claim to fame. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * If catching a disease, even as the last one, and with no other claim to fame, is that significant then we might as well just strike BLP1E from the guidelines right now. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:52, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the best reason to delete this article, and it is a very good one, is not that this one event is not significant enough, but rather that Banu is a low-profile individual and her being involved in this event (ie. her being a smallpox survivor) continues to cause her to be treated poorly. The reason I still voted keep is that her name is very strongly associated with the event, and so I don't think wikipedia is in any way increasing her distress.
 * I usually don't think I should compare articles in AfD, but because I enjoyed reading it, I want to point out there is another high profile medical cases with a wikipedia pages which is BIO1E (Philip Blaiberg). I'm not sure if many exist that are BLP1E. Smmurphy(Talk) 02:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Even setting aside 1E (which I believe was intended to proscribe exactly this kind of article) I have serious doubts she even passes GNG. Her name has been often mentioned but only in the context of being the last known case of smallpox. There is very little else that is out there. Certainly nothing that meets the standard of in depth coverage from multiple reliable secondary sources. There have been whole books written about Hinkley and Oswald. By comparison coverage of her is almost entirely limited to medical articles and interviews. Blaiberg also appears to have received extensive coverage from multiple secondary RS sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - "Oct. 16, 1975, 3-year-old Rahima Banu of Bangladesh became the last human infected with naturally occurring smallpox (variola major). When her immune system killed the last smallpox virus in her body, it also killed the last such smallpox virus in humans. In what is arguably mankind’s greatest achievement, smallpox was eradicated. Our war with this smallpox virus was brutal. It appears likely that the virus killed about one billion of us". Significant event.Vinegarymass911 (talk) 03:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * The eradication of smallpox was indeed a huge event. Her role was incidental, at best. Two sentences about her in an article about smallpox does not confer any great significance on her. Nor does it come close to meeting GNG which as noted above requires in depth coverage about the subject from multiple reliable sources. -Ad Orientem (talk) 04:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep, although notated for WP:BLP1E, but event itself so significant that her life is well documented and the article have well sourced. Ibrahim Husain Meraj (talk) 08:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * merge to Smallpox blatant WP:BLP1E Jytdog (talk) 03:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - WP:BLP1E does not and has never banned articles on persons notable for one event. It's a guideline on how to deal with such topics and when its appropriate for deletion.  Even BLP1E states that it is meant for those who remain low-profile individuals.   Here it is over 40 years later since the case and there is still significant coverage about this person being published and here we all are discusser her.  That means her case was and remains significant.  WP:BLP1E applies as a reason to keep. --Oakshade (talk) 04:20, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
 * really, this is exactly what the BLP policy is meant to address. This person did nothing with respect to smallpox - nothing good, nothing bad.  Things happened to her, and around her.  The event of which she happened to be the vessel is what is significant, not the person.  This is very similar to someone who is a victim of a crime. It is not about them. Jytdog (talk) 06:26, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep The third condition of WP:BLP1E is to avoid an article "If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented." The end of smallpox is a significant event. Her involvement in the event is well documented. BLP1E goes on to say that "the significance of an ... individual is indicated by how persistent the coverage is in reliable sources." Reliable sources have been writing about her in relation to the end of smallpox for four decades. I call that persistent. Sources discuss her in sufficient detail to support the short article.


 * Catching a disease does not normally result in enough coverage to satisfy WP:GNG, but in this case it did. BLP1E addresses cases of otherwise unremarkable people where there is a flurry of coverage that ordinarily would meet GNG, except that it is not persistent, it quickly evaporates. An example would be Articles for deletion/Tanvir Hassan Zoha in relation to 2016 Bangladesh Bank heist. --Worldbruce (talk) 07:14, 15 December 2016 (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.