Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Florence Nibart-Devouard (second nomination)

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 no consensus. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 23:15, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Florence Nibart-Devouard

Florence Nibart-Devouard (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

I think Florence is far less notable than Angela Beesley, who herself is barely notable. Google returns about 1,000 hits by searching for "Florence Nibart-Devouard" and around 470 hits if searching for "Florence Nibart-Devouard" -wikipedia. — Canderous Ordo 00:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Try searching for "Florence Devouard" instead of Nibart-Devouard. Angela. 15:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - appears to fail WP:BIO, only 4 news ghits which seem to be trivial mentions. Self-referential. MER-C 12:54, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I am relieved. Angela told me she had 5 AFD; I felt a little bit neglected :-) Anthere
  • Delete. Being the Chair of the Board of Trustees doesn't establish notability, nor does being a genetics researcher. Wikipedia should not have an article about every Wikimedia-related individual, as this might be very self-referencial. I believe Angela does have some notability as a Wikia co-founder which is a much higher position. Michaelas10 (Talk) 17:55, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Well, I just ran a Nexis search, and found only three distinct articles, all related to WP, and two of those are passing references. In my opinion, that is not sufficient to satisfy WP:BIO.-- danntm T C 22:29, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Successor to Jimmy Wales who wasn't all that well known in 2001. There are some reliable sources for her [1] and given her new position the number of reliable sources will expand rapidly. Notable enough for mine. Capitalistroadster 02:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Per Michaelas10's and Danntm's explanations. — Canderous Ordo 23:16, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Chair of the Wikimedia Board is notable. Bramlet Abercrombie 01:41, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, she photographed the flower in the MediaWiki's logo which is very famous. 16@r 13:13, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. I don't see how this makes her notable, you might then as well create an article over the designers of the Wikipedia logo. Could you please explain yourself further? Michaelas10 (Talk) 21:03, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Oh well excuse me, I wasn't enough accurate, I mean this is another reason among many other to keep this article. It's just show that she has an important place in the Wikimedia & Wikipedia community and will probably become more and more important. But I agree with you, we're not gonnna make an article about all person who designed a famous logo... 16@r 09:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Chair of the Board is a notbale position. Coverage on her will expand. The Minister of War (Peace) 16:43, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete There's really no assertion that she meets any part of BIO. Instead, the assertions to notability are that she's notable as chair of the board or successor to Wales. While it's true she's chair, Wales is still far more the "face" of wikipedia for all intents and purposes. (For example, it's his quasi-likeness that appears here.) After him is Brad Patrick, who has a higher profile in day-to-day operations as the Executive Director, but his article was redirected.--Kchase T 21:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Fails WP:BIO. Also, none of the keep arguments made here are appeals to this or any other notability guideline. Claims that she meets some subjective, personal standard is insufficient grounds to keep an article. Simões (talk/contribs) 23:04, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
    • On the contrary, a guideline is just a guide for those who can't make a decision without it, it's not a policy and it should never supersede simple common sense. Personally, I consider any guideline which would deny notability to the chair of the Wikimedia board to be a stupid guideline, which I'll happily ignore. Just because she's new in the post and is no media whore doesn't change the fact that she's the head of an entity which controls a top-20 website. Bramlet Abercrombie 00:37, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
      • Bramlet Abercrombie, Wikipedia:Notability (people) is a confirmed criteria, not a essay or proposal. If this article does not meet even one of its criteria, there is no reason for this to be kept. Michaelas10 (Talk) 10:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. I suspect notability to WP:BIO standards will become clear before the next year is out, but it will also be easy enough to recreate the article at that time. With neither the ability to read French nor the willingess to pay for archived New York Times articles, I have no opinion on whether WP:BIO has been met yet. GRBerry 04:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, she's the chairman of Wikimedia now, isn't that notable enough?

Terence Ong 06:25, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep. WP:BIO is a guideline. It fails in certain areas, such as key people in highly notable businesses/companies/charities/etc. WP:BIO should be amended. WP:BIO also states "This is not intended to be an exclusionary list" for cases just like this. Royalbroil T : C 13:49, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: I think she's enough known, and outside of the Wikimedia projects. Hégésippe | ±Θ± 21:59, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I agree with Bramlet Abercrombie; WP:BIO specifically says that failure to meet the criteria does not warrant an automatic deletion of an article. Lesgles (talk) 02:30, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Wikipedia is poor in the corporate world. At least lets be thorough with the prople behind this business. -- Beardo 09:31, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
  • keep please she is very notable now as chairperson of wikimedia no need to erase this at all Yuckfoo 02:11, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. She is chairperson of the organization that manages one of the ten biggest websites in the world. bbx 07:13, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per the above. --Myles Long 17:00, 22 December 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.