Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Ann Newman

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 no consensus. Sandstein 11:09, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Ann Newman

[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)

I'm not convinced this lady is notable. —S Marshall T/C 01:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —S Marshall T/C 01:34, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She received Creu de Sant Jordi, NACS Prize and Joan B. Cendrós International Prize. She has an article in Gran Enciclopèdia Catalana and received both American coverage [1] [2] and Catalan media coverage [3] [4], etc. --Davidpar (talk) 04:27, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. - hako9 (talk) 06:11, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Davidpar, in my opinion the sources you provide indicate trivial coverage, [5] being the notable exception. I think being awarded Creu de Sant Jordi is enough to meet WP:ANYBIO #1. Sam-2727 (talk) 22:26, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't. It's a local Catalan award that's given prolifically (at least a couple of dozen every year). I agree with you that all the other sources are trivial.—S Marshall T/C 23:54, 21 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
S Marshall, now take this with a grain of salt since I know next to nothing about Catalonia, but given the sort of autonomous status that Catalonia has, I would consider a high civil honor to be indicatory of notability. As a not-so-perfect parallel (from a field I know more about), we consider American physical society fellows to be notable even though 180+ of these are awarded every year. Sam-2727 (talk) 04:18, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 09:58, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio

09:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:47, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I'm not entirely sure how to evaluate a translator, but her translations have been reviewed in scholarly journals, e.g. Translation Review. pburka (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- To clarify, since apparently some editors didn't understand my position, she's notable because she won an important award and her work as a translator has been the subject of scholarly criticism. pburka (talk) 20:57, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 08:04, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This AfD was previously closed, and then reopened; see this discussion if you'd like to understand the reasons.—S Marshall T/C 09:35, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Google Scholar shows a not insignificant number of translations by this person. Resources other than those on the article indicate a person of some stature and standing in the translation works, and contributions to culture and history. -- Whiteguru (talk) 11:20, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Number of translation works is not relevant — what is needed is something written about the subject, in whatever capacity that confirms their notability. As for the notion that the subject merits a page by virtue of being a recipient of this particular award, I think that is too low of a bar. As far as I'm concerned, the subject's notable significance has not been established by the article at this time. El_C 20:54, 19 September 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.