Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zelda McCague

The result was Redirect Legacypac (talk) 08:45, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

:{{la|Zelda McCague}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zelda_McCague Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Zelda McCague}})

The subject of this article fails to meet the standards of WP:N due to lack of multiple, non-trivial references in reliable, third-party sources. There's no Wikipedia policy or consensus that states that the oldest anything is automatically notable by the encyclopedia's standards; numerous recent AfDs on the "oldest" individuals have been kept or deleted based on their individual merits. Thus we default to the general notability guidelines and any material of encyclopedic merit can be included on the many longevity-related lists on Wikipedia. Canadian Paul 04:30, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• Delete. WP:ONEVENT, WP:MEMORIAL. She is not encyclopedic outside meriting inclusion in the list of centennarian Canadians or such (through whether such a list would be encyclopedic is dubious, too). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:23, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
• Delete Born, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, lived, died. WP:NOPAGE, and anyway apparently one source. EEng (talk) 12:56, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

::How good is this one, EEng: "She was entitled to draw a pension in 1958, at the then-pensionable age of 70." CommanderLinx (talk) 13:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

• Delete and/or Redirect to List of Canadian supercentenarians. WP:NOPAGE. Nothing encyclopedic here other than a name, age and country. Information easily obtained in the various "lists of" articles. CommanderLinx (talk) 13:59, 4 November 2015 (UTC)— CommanderLinx (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Delete or Redirect. Longevity, alone, is no reason for a person to have a stand-alone article. WP:NOPAGE. This subject, does not meet our general notability guidelines and lacks significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. David in DC (talk) 16:54, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:45, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

• Delete doesn't meet WP:GNG. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 17:07, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
• Redirect to relevant list. Clearly non-notable and WP:NOPAGE. ~ Rob^Talk 18:34, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
• Keep or Redirect While Mrs. McCague might not fit the notability criteria, the fact that she was the oldest living Canadian should be enough to give her an entry in the List of Canadian supercentenarians, which could be expanded. 930310 (talk) 15:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC)
• Redirect to List of Canadian supercentenarians seems like a pretty straightforward result here, based on the coverage and inclusion criteria at that list (where she is already listed). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.