Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chukwu octuplets (3rd nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. (non-admin closure) buidhe 17:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chukwu octuplets

edit
AfDs for this article:

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

Chukwu octuplets (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)

Article is trivial. Per WP:BLP1E, "Being in the news does not in itself mean that someone should be the subject of a Wikipedia article." User:Namiba 16:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. User:Namiba 16:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete trvia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:16, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep There was understandably a lot of coverage when this ocurred ([1][2][3][4]), but there's rather sustained coverage 2009, 2008, "World's first octuplets celebrate 3rd birthday". Jet. 101: 23–24. January 2002., [1] and they are referenced just about every time octuplets are born [2] [3][4]. It's borderline, but I think there's enough to indicate a significance that isn't just passing or trivia. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:36, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Lyman, Rick (1998-12-31). "Mother of the Octuplets Goes Home to Recover". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2020-06-05.
  2. ^ "CNN - Octuplets get names; dad gets unwanted publicity - December 23, 1998". web.archive.org. 2016-03-30. Retrieved 2020-06-05.
  3. ^ "Help Pours In for Parents of Octuplets". Los Angeles Times. 1998-12-23. Retrieved 2020-06-05.
  4. ^ NYTimes articles
  • Keep - This special set is so rare, and therefore the amount of sources used in the article are very large, I would say the article could be expanded, but it shouldn't be deleted as it has multiple reliable sources. Koridas (...Puerto Rico for statehood!) 22:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The birth of octuplets who are all still alive and thriving (except for one) ten years later is too exceptional an event, and very well documented. But if we can find reliable updates on the octuplets' lives as teenagers and adults, that would be great. Methychroma (talk) 04:18, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 20:47, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:39, 14 June 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Chukwu_octuplets_(3rd_nomination)&oldid=963234351"