Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jane Ising

: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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:01, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

=[[Jane Ising]]=

:{{la|Jane Ising}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Jane_Ising Stats])

:({{Find sources|Jane Ising}})

Previous prod was removed. This doesn't seem to meet WP:NOTABILITY, seems a case of WP:1E. An alternative proposal was put in to merge it to her husband's article (Ernst Ising.) But that was 3 years ago, and no discussion was started on it, that I could find. Boleyn (talk) 19:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:30, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Delete. Fails WP:PROF outright and WP:BIO in general. Deadbeef (talk) 22:02, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
Delete. There is no evidence of passing WP:PROF, so she seems more likely to be notable as a supercentenarian than an academic. But a few local newspaper articles aren't enough for that. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:48, 23 April 2013 (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.