Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Redaelli-Granoli

:{{la|Maria Redaelli-Granoli}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Maria_Redaelli-Granoli Stats])

:({{Find sources|Maria Redaelli-Granoli}})

Page keeps being created overwriting the redirect to List of Italian supercentenarians. Propose redirect. Subject doesn't meet the notability criteria. WP:ONEEVENT has been cited. Mato (talk) 16:35, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect to List of Italian supercentenarians. No sources indicating notability. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 17:09, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
• Redirect Perhaps some people find it fascinating to learn that "She likes cooking and eating tasty food, reading newspapers and watching television, and listen to football games". But that is not enough for notability. Does not meet WP:GNG. As the nom says, her high age falls under WP:ONEEVENT. If the outcome of this AfD is redirect, then please protect from recurrent IP vandalism. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 17:28, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect to List of Italian supercentenarians, per WP:ONEEVENT. Cavarrone (talk) 05:25, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

She is now one of the 10 oldest people alive today, which definitely makes her notable. Many of the others on this page have their own pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.199.32.138 (talk) 22:02, 19 April 2012 (UTC) — 80.199.32.138 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

:*Comment I beg to differ. The single item interesting about her is her age, which does not make her notable enough for a stand-alone article, because there is basically nothing else to say about her. That other individuals inn that list have stand-alone articles does not mean we should keep this one, too (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. In fact, it probably means that those articles should be redirected to this list, too. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 08:43, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

• Keep. WP:ONEEVENT policy covers material such as a "witness to a fire" who is reported in the news in multiple sources. This is NOT "one event". If the article is about the subject being covered, then it is a non-trivial mention. Also, someone like this is likely to be mentioned for multiple events (112th birthday, becoming Italy's oldest living person, 113th birthday). More than that, if they have a historical legacy such as "Italy's oldest person," that legacy continues after death. The real measure for "delete", "redirect," or "keep" is NOT "one event" but the level of coverage regarding the individual from multiple outside sources.69.15.219.71 (talk) 15:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

:*You mean, "She likes cooking and eating tasty food, reading newspapers and watching television, and listen to football games" is a legacy? The "one event" is "getting old". There is nothing of interest to tell about this person except for her age, which can be done perfectly well in a table in a list article. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 16:18, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

::*What's getting old is the mis-citation of a policy that does not apply to this or similar articles. Old age is NOT an event, it is a fact. Celebrating a birthday may be an "event", but then if you have two birthday stories, that's two events.

So, the focus should be on "coverage". If others feel that there is not enough material for a separate article at this time, a mini-biography format would be an acceptable compromise. It does seem, however, that we do not yet know how long this lady will live and whether she achieves the "notability" of someone like Jiroemon Kimura, whose 115th birthday ranked in the top-five searches on Yahoo today (oops, an "event"...but not the first one!). It also seems that the "English" Wikipedia has been subtly biased against ITALIAN cases, in particular: there's not a single individual article on an Italian supercentenarian, except for an Italian who moved to America...Dina Manfredini...where suddenly, being in an English-language source makes someone "notable."

There also is a horrible Wikipedia bias in favor of youth and sports. Someone could be a "major" league "hockey player" and die in a plane crash in Russia at age 21 and be "notable," even though they did nothing out of the ordinary, really. Wikipedia is not paper, but if we are to impose standards that require someone to actually accomplish something memorable to be "notable," living to become Italy's oldest person is a far-more rare and unique event than playing in a single "major" league sports game...something that's not considered "one-event," by the way.

Wikipedia is supposed to be an "encyclopedia," not a fan-page, but neither a place where article worthiness is determined by editorial whim of "i-voting". Comments about what this woman eats may be trivial, but to know that someone is still functional enough to cook at 113 is another story. Finally, if you are not "interested," you don't have to read it. Or, you could edit out what you consider "trivial" and leave the rest. Given this woman is alive and in good shape, the potential for further article expansion and media coverage a year or two from now (more events!) exists.69.15.219.71 (talk) 18:52, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Being the oldest living italian and 10th oldest living person doesn't make a person notable while the oldest living English and 25th oldest living person is worth a page... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Jones_%28supercentenarian%29.

Please don't be Anglocentric.Ddl21 (talk) 23:30, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

:*Comment As was said above: WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. As far as I'm concerned, that this person is Italian is just coincidence and those "Anglocentric" bios should most probably be redirected to the appropriate list articles, too. The supercentenarian wikiproject is chock full of this kind of articles and needs a drastic overhaul. Please feel free to start cleaning up the Anglocentric ones. --Guillaume2303 (talk) 10:11, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

• Redirect I don't see any evidence of non-trivial coverage in multiple, third party sources that would satisfy WP:N and despite the arguments above, I do not believe the "one event" hurdle has been cleared. There is no encyclopedic information here that could not be reasonably included in the many other pages and lists about supercentenarians, in particular list of Italian supercentenarians. Yes she may get more references if she gets older, but per WP:CRYSTAL, it's not our place to speculate and we can revisit the issue if and when the time comes. Canadian Paul 14:56, 23 April 2012 (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.