Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stefania Wolicka


 * 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The result was   keep, nomination withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:46, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Stefania Wolicka

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

I added references to this article, but I cannot find anything to verify the claim that she was the first woman to receive a PhD. All references I can find (in English and Polish) suggest she was the first to do so - at the University of Zurich, a qualifier which makes her achievement fall under the threshold of notability. Unless somebody can find a ref that that was indeed the first female PhD, I see nothing to warrant keeping this article. Still, I hope I am wrong, which is why I am AfDing this instead of a prod. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 03:04, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I, too, cannot find evidence that she was the first female PhD, but she's notable regardless, per WP:GNG. Consider her inclusion in a dictionary of Polish biography: . There also seem to be conflicting claims about whether she was Polish or Russian. and  both claim she was Russian. Pburka (talk) 03:42, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Ummm, the first cited source is not a biography dictionary, but a bibliography one (Bibliografia polska), and her entry there is just an address? As far as I can make out the mostly German entry. Nothing in it supports her notability. Regarding nationality, this is something to discuss if we decide to keep this entry. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 03:45, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops. I'd misinterpreted the first link. However I still feel that the amount of coverage in modern academic works for someone who graduated in 1875 is sufficient notability. Pburka (talk) 03:55, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I tend to be an inclusionist, but just coverage without having done anything is not enough for notability. What did she do to merit an article? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 17:22, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:Notability isn't based on achievement. It's based on significant coverage in reliable sources. Pburka (talk) 00:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:55, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I added more info to the article and some sources. Several historians cite her as the first modern-era woman to get a PhD in Europe, so I don't see how that's under dispute. Switzerland was the first country to allow women to graduate from its universities in the modern era. Women weren't even allowed to graduate from anywhere else in Europe at the time, so it isn't like it's tough to verify that claim (lack of competition for the title); her activism in the face of (rather strong) government opposition to women's higher learning also makes her notable, and she continued in her activism and research for decades after graduating, I did find a source to show that. Yah, being the first person in modern Europe to get a PhD despite femaleness, and government persecution on top of it, is notable. She was Polish - ethnically and culturally, she identified with Polish nationalism and published in Polish later in life, after completing her education in German; she was born in Warsaw which was in the Russian Empire at the time, thus the ambiguity over her nationality in some sources.OttawaAC (talk) 01:19, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Sigh! Looks notable to me. Sarah (talk) 01:45, 1 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. I've had a quick look through the sources, and she's seems notable enough. There was apparently an Italian woman, Elena Cornaro, who obtained a doctorate in philosophy in 1678 (see footnote 14), but that's the kind of issue that can be worked out on talk. SlimVirgin (talk) 01:59, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Definite historical interest. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:11, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. Thank you, I see you were able to find excellent sources. I suggest the article is now nominated at T:DYK :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 02:33, 1 June 2012 (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.