Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Ryder

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. One can return to the deletion discussion in a couple of years, trying to add sources in the meanwhile.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:02, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Angela Ryder

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I couldn't establish that she meets WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 20:14, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:00, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:00, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Subject is only mentioned in passing in reliable sources. Page also reads like a puff piece. Meatsgains (talk) 03:39, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Needs to be edited to be more encyclopaedic, certainly, but subject is certainly notable within her field. —Sam Wilson 10:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Sources neither establish notability against as per the deletion nom, nor are are reliable. I could not find alternate sources to establish notability. Aeonx (talk) 21:33, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — I have added more info on Angela. She is a notable woman in the Noongar community of Western Australia and was inducted into the WA Women's Hall of Fame in 2011 in the first 100 most notable women of Western Australia — Mary 10:15, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Blight NYS, which part of WP:BIO or WP:GNG do you think it meets? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 06:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC) Boleyn,Angela has received several well-known and significant award or honors has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. She has contributed greatly to the Noongar Community of Western Australia and continues to do so.Mary Blight NYS (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the article is still questionable at best, delete until better solid details and sources are available. SwisterTwister talk 22:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:45, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article obviously needs some work, but the person is definitely notable. We need articles like this to make sure we are not reinforcing Wikipedia's systemic bias.VanEman (talk) 16:21, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

VanEman, how is it clearly notable? How does it meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG? Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 06:42, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I'm seeing nice source coverage at Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL and Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. — Cirt (talk) 20:35, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Omni Flames (talk contribs) 06:43, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment (has already voted) ~~Keep~~, I agree with Cirt. I was easily able to find more reliable references that are not included in the article at the moment. Our guidelines don't say that the article already has to be completely referenced, but rather that the references be available. They are. VanEman (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- VanEman, voting twice is very misleading, I've struck out the keep vote but left yout comments. Boleyn (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.