Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Eliza Williams (2nd nomination)

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 16:44, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Eliza Williams

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG. Only sources I can find in a WP:BEFORE search are WP:ROUTINE about being the oldest person in the world, mostly short obituaries. Per wikipedia policy, being the oldest person in the world does not grant an automatic notability presumption. SportingFlyer talk 06:55, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:49, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to the chronological list section at oldest people where she is appropriately listed. Nom is spot on. There is no guideline/policy that the oldest living person is automatically notable. The last AFD closed as no consensus back in November 2015 and no improvement has been made in regards to sourcing or expanding the article beyond the absolute bare basics (name, born, married, died) or fluffy longevity trivia (ages of siblings). Even if the sources meant she was somehow notable, there is nothing of interest to say about her other than her name, birth/death dates and that she was the oldest in the world at some point. Easily handled on a list per WP:NOPAGE, WP:PERMASTUB and the biographies section at the WP:WOP wikiproject. CommanderLinx (talk) 11:33, 10 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with above. Tacyarg (talk) 00:58, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:51, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This article fails WP:GNG and the little encyclopedic information it contains (name, nationality, age, birth/death dates) is easily displayed on a list, which it already is elsewhere, instead of in a longevity trivia filled Permastub. Information about her relatives and the standard "secret" to her longevity question she answered add nothing of value to this encyclopedia. Newshunter12 (talk) 22:49, 13 August 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.