Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonia Gerena Rivera

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 keep. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 15:22, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Antonia Gerena Rivera

[edit]


Antonia Gerena Rivera (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable supercentenarian. Fails WP:GNG, no significant coverage in reliable sources. The little information in this article (her name, age and country) is already present in at least six "list of" longevity articles. According to the WP:WOP (World's Oldest Person) Wikiproject, she also fails WP:ONEEVENT as she is only notable for her longevity. Living to a certain age doesn't make someone notable. CommanderLinx (talk) 16:55, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • As much as I appreciate your concerns, I don't appreciate you automatically assuming people were canvassed. Ollie originally voted delete, was he canvassed? I just happened to look up Antonia Gerena Rivera after she died and saw that she was up for deletion. I used to automatically assume afd nominators acted in bad faith but certain times I was wrong. Supercentenarian researchers have the right to chime in without being accused of canvassing. Since when is it a crime for people to comment concerning articles in a topic that interests them? A few months ago, I commented on unrelated afd's. As for "one event", sometimes one event can be a notable event. This "one event" has received sufficient coverage. Each time she broke a record, that was an event, each birthday she celebrated as a supercentenarian is a noted event. The reason there is a WOP group is because there are many people who do consider longevity to be notable. If living long wasn't notable, then tell me why so many people make the news just by celebrating a triple digit birthday. I honestly consider your automatic canvass accusation to be in bad faith. Just because the majority has voiced their opinion and used facts to back it up doesn't mean we were canvassed nor does it mean we were looking for votes. Longevitydude (talk) 13:37, 11 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Absolutely no claims to notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Note: We could use that same argument to say "growing to a certain height or failing to reach a certain height doesn't make a person notable." Other commenters have made good claims to the notability of the oldest Puerto Rican woman ever. Also, she the oldest Floridian resident ever. Thank you both for your concerns but consensus clearly believes she's notable. Rest in Peace Antonia Gerena Rivera. Longevitydude (talk) 02:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Longevitydude (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. [reply]

*Delete She does not have "absolutely no claims to notability" as stated above, as she is the oldest female ever born in Puerto Rico and one of the top 40 oldest people ever. However, there has been absolutely no coverage of her in the media and thus, there is little point in her having her own article which only states things that are already included in other articles. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 14:05, 8 June (UTC)

  • Keep Antonia Gerena is the oldest woman ever from Puerto Rico. She is also the oldest person ever to have lived in the state of Florida. Living to a certain age definitely garners you notability. How many appearances you make in the media does not define how notable you are. Antonia is mentioned in several reliable sources, the GRG is one of them. 930310 (talk) 18:44, 8 June 2015 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that 930310 (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. [reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Antonia Gerena Rivera is very notable person. Not only she is the oldest woman ever, who has ever been born on Puerto Rico, but also she is the oldest person, who has ever lived in Florida. The longevity recordholder of Florida. What is more, she was one of the last surviving people born in the XIXth century on Earth as well as one of the few, who have reached beyond 115 years of age. What is the most important, her age has been successfully verified by an international scientific organization, which is the Gerontology Research Group. She has also been mentioned among the 10 oldest living people by the Guiness World Records. GRG itself is the world's biggest authority in the field of extreme longevity tracking. The recognition of the GWR confirms the notability of Mrs. Antonia Gerena Rivera. The newspaper reports, articles, can't serve here as good sources, because of many mistakes, which have been made in the past by journalists in this field of science. However, here it's not the case, because Mrs. Antonia Gerena Rivera has been recognized by both the GRG and the GWR. The article should be kept, because it considers one of the most remarkable people ever and also it serves as the source of knowledge for the society, on how long can the people truly live.Waenceslaus (talk) 19:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Let me make it clear that my concern here is only the lack of content, not her notability. She is one of just 37 people to verifiably live to the age of 115. She was in the top 5 oldest living people at the time of her death. She is the oldest female ever born in Puerto Rico, and the oldest person ever to die in Florida. Her age is recognised by The Gerontology Research Group and Guinness World Records. Notability is established through reliable sources, but these do not necessarily have to be news outlets. The GRG is a scientific organisation and far more reliable than news sources, who report ridiculous claims like a "160 year old man". The WP:ONEEVENT envisioned someone on the street interviewed about a fire or traffic accident and that interview being published in multiple reliable sources. The "one event" guideline doesn't apply here because the article is about the person herself, not a witness to one event. If any news reports containing biographical information come out, then I would hastily change my vote. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 22:14 (UTC)

KEEP - Mrs Rivera is one of only 37 persons ever to reach age 115. She is also he oldest woman ever from Puerto Rico and will hold his record probably for some years given the age of other claimants from that country. In terms of sportsmen and women (among other categories or items we could consider) we keep significant records of persons whom have achieved far less than Mrs Rivera. For consistency purposes her claim to remain is far stronger than that for many other persons mentioned on Wikipedia. Chris Redman - redmancj@bigpond.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.128.102.6 (talk) 03:24, 9 June 2015 (UTC) — 202.128.102.6 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

KEEP - She is the oldest person ever from Puerto Rico which makes her a notable women. Petervermaelen (talk) 07:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)Note: An editor has expressed a concern that Petervermaelen (talk • contribs) has been canvassed to this discussion. [reply]

  • Change vote to keep The article has now been expanded and her death has made the news. I believe the article now contains sufficient information to justify a stand-alone article. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 00:44, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: AFD is WP:NOTAVOTE. I'm suspecting some keep votes above have been canvassed to this discussion. I note that some users above have not edited Wikipedia in months (in one case, they have made three edits since May 2014, including two for this AFD.) but they decide to return to Wikipedia just in time for this article to be discussed at AFD! Back to the article, I appreciate that sources have been added, but according to the WP:WOP Wikiproject, as these sources do not provide significant details on anything but her longevity, she fails WP:BLP1E and belongs on a list. I will also point out that the reasons for "keeping" this article (that she's the 37th oldest person, oldest from Floria and oldest woman in Puerto Rico) are all present in List of the verified oldest people, List of supercentenarians from the United States and List of Puerto Rican supercentenarians. Sourcing in this article is unlikely to improve either. One of the sources used in this article states (and I quote): "there has been virtually no news coverage of this woman's existence" so she fails WP:GNG. CommanderLinx (talk) 16:12, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The ONLY reason I initially voted "delete" was because of a lack of press coverage meaning that few biographical details other than basics (such as name, lifespan, etc) were known, thus making a stand-alone article seemingly "not worth it". In hindsight, I should have waited as obituaries are often published several days after death, as we have seen here. And this obituary contains information such as the names of her parents, the number of grandchildren, and the ages reached by her siblings (two of whom lived to be over 100). The last bit information is particularly of interest to a longevity-related article, as it is often suggested that genes play a role in longevity. If she had just been in a list, users would not know this information. So, your statement that "these sources do not provide significant details on anything but her longevity" isn't true.
Now let's respond to some of your other points:
  • 1. "I will also point out that the reasons for "keeping" this article (that she's the 37th oldest person, oldest from Floria and oldest woman in Puerto Rico) are all present in List of the verified oldest people, List of supercentenarians from the United States and List of Puerto Rican supercentenarians" --- What kind of logic is this? You can find out that Roger Federer has won the most men's Grand Slam singles titles in this article, so I guess he doesn't need his own article, right?
  • 2. There's being notable for your longevity, and there's being notable for your longevity AND being a significant record holder. We see 107-109 year olds get featured in news stories all the time, so clearly someone considers them somewhat notable - BUT, 107-109 year olds are relatively very common. But someone living to 115, being the oldest ever female from their country of birth, and the oldest person ever from their state of death? That's not someone living to a relatively common age, dying, and then getting forgotten about by most people. That's someone who is notable in the long term.
  • 3. The WOP doesn't say that persons only notable for longevity can't have an article. It gives Jeanne Calment as an example that, indeed, someone can be notable for their longevity. The question is whether the person's longevity made them notable enough that their life was more than just "one event". I would argue that someone who died at 110 or 111 and not a recordholder may not be notable, but as I say above, someone who is 115 and a record holder is a continuing reference point.
  • 4. The WOP says this: "Articles on centenarians and supercentenarians are biographies. The notability guidelines for biographies apply. Significant, independent coverage in reliable sources is required. Some long-lived people are notable principally for their advanced age, e.g., Jeanne Calment. If the individual is not notable in any other way, the article is subject to Wikipedia policy guidance on one-event biographies. A subject whose biography is based on only one or two reliable sources establishing notability may belong on a list, rather than in a stand-alone biography, unless these sources provide significant details beyond longevity." --- The WikiProject WOP guidelines (which are guidelines and not a policy and can be changed, in any instance) don't use the word "fail". They differentiate between a biography covered by multiple (3 or more) independent sources (and likely to be of continuing significance) and those covered by just 1 or 2. It also uses the word "may" (not "must") belong on a list, and includes the caveat "unless these sources provide significant details beyond longevity". You'll find quite a bit more than 3 sources for Antonia Gerena Rivera (although, admittedly, most were in list format until recently). In the case of Antonia Gerena Rivera, we have an article from the Miami Herald giving significantly more information about her than just that she was 115 years old. I have mentioned those details above.
In summary: We have someone who has reached an EXTREMELY rare age, who holds two significant all-time records, is featured in reliable scientific sources such as the Gerontology Research Group (who has verified her age) and we now have seen her featured in the news which has allowed us to expand the article to include biographic details, so the argument that "the little information in this article (her name, age and country) is already present in at least six "list of" longevity articles" is no longer valid. -- Ollie231213 (talk) 22:01, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • One more comment Antonia Gerena Rivera, as a notable person with world-wide recognition, has her articles also on other language versions of Wikipeida. It is not a desirable action to delete articles from English Wikipedia, which has the greatest number of articles, which are also of the best quality. How could an article on Antonia Gerena Rivera not exist in English version, while it does in German, Polish, Dutch, French, Japanese, Swedish. The English Wikipedia should not be impoverished. Waenceslaus (talk) 13:21, 13 June 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Antonia_Gerena_Rivera&oldid=1068824314"