Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deborah Bial

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Enigmamsg 20:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Deborah Bial (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to pass GNG. A line or two in Posse Foundation would suffice. Zigzig20s (talk) 20:39, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Why not mention that in Posse Foundation?Zigzig20s (talk) 01:48, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It can also be mentioned in the article on the foundation; that's not the point. The point is that it makes her independently notable. Put it this way: in the 20-year range from 1991 to 2011, all MacArthur winners have articles (and there are only scattered exceptions before and after). What quality do you think singles her out as the one winner who is somehow not deserving of an article? —David Eppstein (talk) 01:50, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:56, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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.