Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rita Ubriaco  (2nd nomination)

:{{la|Rita Ubriaco}} ([{{fullurl:Rita Ubriaco|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rita Ubriaco (2nd nomination)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Normally I would speedy this as a recreation of previously deleted material but since its been such a long time since then I will put up a new afd for it. Just as just as non-notable as she was last time she fell to afd. None of the sources support her notability, and in searching for other sources nothing comes up. Djsasso (talk) 03:55, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

• Delete I concur, this article seems pointless. Pstanton 04:00, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Bearcat (talk) 05:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Weak delete only in that it seems possible that there may be sources out there somewhere for a biography of this woman but I cannot find any in an admittedly speedy, lazy, google search. Your bringing it to AfD seems wise. DoubleBlue (talk) 05:19, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Delete, since even with sources there is nothing of note about this person. Not every person, even if they really did exist and verifiably had jobs and passions, needs to have a WP entry. Drmies (talk) 05:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Weak delete. I actually would vote "Keep" on this article if the sources given supported the claims. It's easy for us today to forget how significant things were like being "the first woman on a medical faculty" She ostensibly received the Order of Canada, but that too I think is not supported by any reputable source. Combine all the claims and I think she scrapes across the notability threshold, were said claims properly supported. Unschool 07:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

::I think the website which makes the Order of Canada claim is confusing that with the Canada Council, for what it's worth (especially because it states Canada Council in the text and then merely captions the accompanying photo with a claim that she's receiving the OC). Just to clarify in case anybody here doesn't know the difference, the Canada Council is a federal arts granting organization to which appointment should, at least in theory, be notable enough for our purposes if it's properly referenced, but being named to the OC means you're being given an award, while being named to the Canada Council means you're being given a job. Bearcat (talk) 15:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

• Keep - I believe that this person has achieved notability. (Being a city councillor, or a Canada Council member, is enough for me). Articles should be sourced, but I'd prefer to leave this up and let someone find the sources. - Richard Cavell (talk) 07:59, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Keep - It is sad that a person from Thunder Bay would consider deleting Rita Ubriaco. I did know her more than most and saw her humility resulted in lack of striving for publicity, and a more concern for doing public good. To repeat what Richard said, "I believe that this person has achieved notability. (Being a city councillor, or a Canada Council member, is enough for me."....me too ! --Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 16:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• First off, where I am from is irrelevant, she is non-notable as she fails WP:BIO and WP:V, until you can bring forth third party reliable sources that proove otherwise. And to quote from WP:POLITICIAN "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability". -Djsasso (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

:::Just for the record, it doesn't necessarily prevent it, either — a city councillor certainly can have an article if there are sufficient reliable sources to support one. Bearcat (talk) 19:10, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

::::Oh I realize that, I was just rebutting their opinion that just being one was good enough. I have already stated the article lacks sources. -Djsasso (talk) 19:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per lack of acceptable sourcing (and for what it's worth, it's pretty firmly established that just being a local council member is not notability). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
• Delete Notability not established. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
• Delete unless proper sourcing can be found for claims of notability. Edward321 (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Notable ? She was many, many things...city councillor, ran in a provincial electon, honored with many things...and she was not notable ? Others can't find 'sources'... Seems we have a political agenda here ? Has anyone checked to see if (like the radical lesbians having an antimale agenda) that we have the reverse here ? I would check the sources ! --Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 18:31, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

:You need to read WP:Reliable sources. Being a city councillor does not mean she is automatically notable, same with running in a provincial election. There is no political agenda here, and you always claim there is an agenda when people disagree with your opinion which is contrary to WP:AGF. If you think she is notable then you need to find sources that meet WP:RS. -Djsasso (talk) 18:35, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

::Unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, assume that people who work on the project are trying to help it, not hurt it. If criticism is needed, discuss editors' actions, but avoid accusing others of harmful motives without particularly strong e0vidence I use to "assume" that most people would operate in Good Faith...however, when i see the resistence to items like the Montreal Massacre to simple truths, there is no doubt an agenda...in some cases there is not... Someday, we will look back on some of the edits and some of the 'attacks' to allowing certain edits and understand that some people do not operate on the basis of good faith, fairness, justice and The Truth of the matter...as best we can know of it....keep up the 'battle' for The Truth...I still say she is quite notable...if the Mayor can be listed, and so should the councillor....they both have the same voting power on council...not like the PM and MP's in the Canadian Parliament...that is another story...Just printing my opinion under my real name for future reference...Remember there are some people who are 'politically incorrect' and who history does not record because the 'source writers' will not accept them....--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 20:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

::: Caesar J.B. Squitti, please do not take the lack of notability personally or as equal to lack of importance. WP:Notability has a specific meaning in Wikipedia meaning, simply, that there are a lack of sources, in other words, have not been "noted" by Reliable sources. FWIW, though I am unfamiliar with Ubriaco, from the article and brief google search I did, it appears to me that she was indeed an honourable and giving important person who helped to enrich the community. In Wikipedia, that does not make a biography eligible for an article, however. Among our most important pillars are the Core content policies of WP:Verifiability, WP:NPOV, and WP:No original research. Regards, DoubleBlue (talk) 23:07, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

:::: Okay...found three new links including directing for the Cambrian Players, designing and directing for the national stage, and a relationship with Dr. Penny Petrone....--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 00:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

:::::Unfortunately those are just trivial mentions, the sources have to be articles about the person. And atleast one of the sites is a site you yourself edit. -Djsasso (talk) 01:16, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

::::::The others include the CBC, etc....Her involvment in Saint Anthony's Fire....well I was the Church Parish council secretary....(thats credible info from the inside...would you not say ?) You bring up a good point, what about people who don't use their real names, what sources do they or their spouses include ? --Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 16:20, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

:::::::And the CBC link as I mentioned is only trivial, it mentions her in passing that she will be a guest on the show, it does not talk about her. And yes you were inside, however you might be full of "point of view" as you would violate WP:COI if you were to write something about St. Anthonys on Wiki. Secondly. whether I use my real name on here or not doesn't matter, because I can't use myself as a source, I need I use reliable sources in articles. -Djsasso (talk) 20:42, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Excuse me for not clarifying....We don't know some contributors real names, and their connection to the so-called reliable source ? That is a challenge.

I would not consider myself in a conflict of interest, nor a point of view, merely the only view in this matter. Anyway we are learning many important truths about sources...--Caesar J.B. Squitti: Son of Maryann Rosso and Arthur Natale Squitti (talk) 22:13, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

:You are making no sense, what sources are you talking about? Did you read the link to see what a reliable source is? ie a major newspaper, a magazine etc etc. Contributers are not sources. -Djsasso (talk) 22:25, 6 December 2008 (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.