Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marion Carlstrom

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. Tone 08:36, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Marion Carlstrom

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:Soldier. Lettler^hello 01:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler^hello 01:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler^hello 01:51, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG. I don't accept that first woman airforce service pilot from Colorado and second woman in Peru to have a pilot's license is sufficiently notable. Mztourist (talk) 06:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete being the first recruit from your state into a particular air service division, even a well known one, is not a sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As a pioneer of aviation. Seems to have sufficient coverage to meet WP:GNG. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: That the subject might not meet WP:SOLDIER is as may be, but she does meet the GNG. The sources already in the article give her significant coverage, having just read the Daily Press article and the two books; there's enough coverage in all three. (I added the page refs for the Bledsoe book, for the record.) Ravenswing 01:26, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio

10:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:52, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 15:11, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Ravenswing. Passes GNG from the sources currently in the article. pburka (talk) 21:38, 18 August 2020 (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.