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. MBisanz ^talk 21:45, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Josephine Ray (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)

Person who was the oldest person ever recorded born in Prince Edward Island, the fourth-oldest person ever born in Canada, and ultimately the oldest American ever (and second oldest in the world) is full of cruft about these "titles", not actually notable and per WP:NOPAGE should be deleted. Of the sources, the GRG table indicates the material facts about here, Redsoxconnection.com is dead and not likely a reliable source, and the remaining sources are WP:ROUTINE obituary stories. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:19, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk  09:26, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Musa Talk  09:26, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep. She was oldest person in the U.S. is so notable. user:Ricky81682 is issued deletion discussions of a large amount, but some of them is indisputably abnormal. user:Ricky81682's personal reason that hate oldest people article is not the correct reason to delete this page. In addition, many people with similar titles, results in the past of AfD (1, 2, 3, 4) has become Keep.--Inception2010 (talk) 10:52, 11 November 2015 (UTC)--Inception2010 (talk) 11:01, 11 November 2015 (UTC) — Inception2010 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Comment. I have corrected some of the problems of this article.[1]--Inception2010 (talk) 11:54, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for NOPAGE. Born-worked-married-died, plus (if you can believe it) "Ray followed, as much as possible, the Boston Red Sox baseball team. After watching baseball games, she often had cake and ice cream. At her 108th birthday celebration, she was greeted with the song "Take Me Out to the Ball Game" and a cake with the Red Sox symbol on it. Ray continued to buy Red Sox merchandise, and commented that she intended to continue doing so." The followup statement that a completely unrelated old person, Fred Hale, "who lived to be 113 years 354 days old, was also a fan of the team", borders on self-parody. EEng (talk) 15:28, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. World's oldest Boston Red Sox fan is notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 166.171.121.177 (talk) 20:41, 12 November 2015 (UTC) — 166.171.121.177 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

• Delete as yet one more non-notable individual who happened to live a little longer than most. Old age is not notability - "inherent to their being" or otherwise. Scr★pIron^IV 20:44, 12 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This article has no problem. she was the 2nd oldest living person in the world out of a population of 7 Billion and oldest in United States. Record holders of oldest living American usually have an article.--153.151.83.197 (talk) 07:34, 13 November 2015 (UTC) — 153.151.83.197 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete and Redirect to List of the verified oldest people. Nothing here justifies a stand-alone article. WP:NOPAGE. Perhaps a line about Ms. Ray and Mr. Hale should be added to Boston Red Sox. It was in a newspaper once so it must be notable, right? Maybe Red Sox fan-hood is a factor in human longevity. I think someone should submit a paper on the topic to the Planck Institute. David in DC (talk) 18:26, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keeep Was featured several times in the media and several sources provide notability. The anti-supercentenarian crew keeps using the same arguments over and over despite general consensus being that longevity warrants notability. Mrs. Ray was the oldest living North American and the second oldest person in the world at the time of her death. 930310 (talk) 17:54, 15 November 2015 (UTC) This editor has made few or no other edits outside this topic.[reply]
• Keep There are a lot of additional sources. One only has to have the will to search for them. I'd advise that to those who constantly nominate articles for deletion instead of improving them.
• Aiken Standard March 9, 2010
• Winnipeg Free Press January 27, 2010
• Brandon Sun January 27, 2010

As of Mrs. Ray, she has received a lot of media attention and her remarkable age has been scientifically proven.White Eaglet (talk) 23:16, 15 November 2015 (UTC) This editor has made few or no other edits outside this topic.[reply]

You haven't answered the WP:NOPAGE argument i.e. that even accepting (for the sake of argument) that the subject is notable, there's insufficient worthwhile stuff to say about him or her to justify a standalone article, and/or that what little is known about the subject is better presented in the context of a larger article or list. EEng (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Those three pages have been removed. Are those all stories following her death? - Ricky81682 (talk) 23:30, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note, none of the three links provided by WhiteEaglet actually lead anywhere. David in DC (talk) 17:00, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Routine coverage in mainly local newspaper does not meet WP:N. Polequant (talk) 14:50, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect Another "born-lived-had a family-enjoyed sport-got old-got real old-died" type of article. longevity by itself is not notable. Blackmane (talk) 23:32, 17 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Really? The 2nd oldest person in the world isn't notable? I beg to differ. She died over 5 years ago so sourcing will be more difficult, but not a reason to delete this page.--Uietueps (talk) 07:55, 20 November 2015 (UTC) This editor has made few or no other edits outside this topic.[reply]
• Keep the claim of notability is supported by an article that provides the significant coverage required by policy, with multiple reliable and verifiable sources. Alansohn (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As explained a number of times now, notability is only the beginning of the question of whether a subject should have a standalone page -- see WP:NOPAGE. Your comments don't speak to that question. EEng (talk) 00:05, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The beginning and end of this discussion, is that the article provides ample coverage of the topic, far exceeding the standard to have a standalone page. Your arguments might gain a greater sense of credibility if they weren't gratingly repeated over and over again, especially after they've been considered and directly rejected. Alansohn (talk) 06:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Yet another "biography" with no encyclopedic information whatsoever. I agree with EEng, this is a parody of an "article". NOPAGE big time. --Randykitty (talk) 14:42, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - meets WP:GNG. Just Chilling (talk) 17:52, 22 November 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.