Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackie Beere

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. Kusma (討論) 11:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jackie Beere

I'm sure she's a very nice person and a good teacher, but this article does not establish sufficient notability for an encyclopedic article. Would suggest to the closing admin that the page is userfied to the creator, should consensus be in favor of deletion. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 09:28, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

There's been some changes to this article since I nominated it for deletion, and while I never actually voted, I've starting to think that it was a poor AfD candidate — the OBE has been confirmed, and the addition of her book helps that much more. I originally mistook this as a vanity article by Beere herself, which it isn't. Since AfD's exist to establish whether an article is appropriate for inclusion here, and others have demonstrated that it indeed is, I'm retracting my support of the AfD and changing my vote to keep. Thanks to those who went through the effort of improving the article since the nom. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 02:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as non-notable per nomination. This article was created, went through speedy (with tag removed by author), prod (tag removed by author) and finally to AfD, all within 8 hours.--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 11:27, 25 July 2006 (UTC) Keep - the article how has shown nobility and is well sourced. --Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 21:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Nothing here that meets WP:BIO.--Fuhghettaboutit 12:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Question The article says she received an OBE. Is that sufficient for notability? NawlinWiki 12:26, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Gonna vote Keep with the OBE verified. NawlinWiki 21:02, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. --Merovingian - Talk 14:42, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep! OBE = notability! It's and achievment AND her website is used often by many other teachers as a reference site! Making her NOTABLE within the realms of teachers.--Gainax 16:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Who cares about notability? This woman recieved an OBE. Trollderella 17:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Also, the nature of her website at [1] raises at least the question of advertising. I see that University of Leicester says she received an MBE, not an OBE. Is there a good source citation for her having actually received an OBE (other than her own website?) Dpbsmith (talk) 19:37, 25 July 2006 (UTC) P. S. I don't see anything in WP:BIO about the MBE constituting sufficient achievement to merit a WIkipedia article. Perhaps someone should try adding it to that policy page and see whether it sticks. I'm not going to do it myself, because I don't think it's sufficient. Dpbsmith (talk) 19:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Citation found via the BBC for her becoming an OBE in 2002. Added to article. -- nae'blis _(talk) 14:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Mattisse 20:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, seems to correspond to the "notable in her field" criterion. More sources could be found, but I've made a start on probably the biggest one. Multiple non-trivial mentions in major news outlets. 8 hours is way too fast for a progressively saved article, please don't harass new contributors. This article was flagged for CSD in less than 60 seconds, then expanded, then marked for deletion again 14 minutes later, then expanded, then prodded 6 hours after that, while the editor had been working on it the whole time. -- nae'blis _(talk) 14:28, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

For a six hour block, the editor wasn't working on it, and lacking any sort of information to indicate otherwise, it suggested that the article had taken the form he intended it to take — hence the prod. If you'd look through the edit history to see who had added the speedy deletion tag, you'd notice it was User:Pap3rw8, who has a history of overeagerness when it comes to article deletion (and is likely not monitoring this vote). And had you looked at the talk page, you'd see an explanation and offer of assistance from me. Finally, I suggested to userfy the article so the user's work wouldn't be lost (and possibly be available for an article in the future if consensus is for deletion but he can later establish notability). Please don't insinuate that this AfD is about harassing a user — it's not, and the suggestion can only breed bad faith. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa!

I apologize, I was not trying to insinuate that this was an intentional harassment campaign on Gainax. It's just that, from looking at the article's history (which I did do before I posted here), there's a pattern of quick, terse deletion edits while Gainax worked for several hours to improve the article to try to stop them from coming. By the time you prodded, the article already had the OBE claim (unsourced at the time, but certainly a claim of notability). Only after gainax asked on the talk page did you engage in a discussion, rather than a place-a-template-remove-a-template shell game. I know New Pages patrol is a pain in the ass, and a lot of crap does try to get posted here, I was merely trying to remind folks that AFD should be the last step, not the first one (the initial speedy was appropriate for the state of the article's first edit, of course, but things evolved rather quickly from there). I don't think six hours is all that long a time to take a break... remember Don't Panic! -- nae'blis _(talk) 19:21, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

...I have to sleep. The page was written around 2am (UK). I apologise for being a mere human, not a machine. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gainax (talk • contribs) .

• UPDATE* I have added 2 new items: One an interview with a faction of Channel 4, a mainstream terrestrial broadcaster in the UK. Secondly a link to the PUBLISHED BOOK of Jackie Beere... I belive these are notable achievments.--Gainax 16:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Both are good additions to the article and will help establish her importance — however, please don't add additional votes onto this page. Thanks. Tijuana Brass^¡Épa! 16:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep OBE, come on. Keep! Aye-Aye 23:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep For God's sake let him finish writing the goddamn thing before you read through and decide on notability. She is notable in her field. Just because you haven't heard of her doesn't mean unimportant. --CalPaterson 00:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. When the Queen of England makes someone an OBE for "services to education", I'd say that makes one notable in the field of teaching. --Wine Guy Talk 08:45, 27 July 2006 (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.