Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carrie C. White

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 delete. Sandstein 10:27, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Carrie C. White

[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)

This person's only claim to notability was reaching an advanced age, that was later reduced from 116 to 102. Article and sources provide no significant information about her life and deeds besides the detective work around her alleged birth date, hence there is nothing to preserve. Perhaps a short paragraph in Longevity claims? That article seems reserved for claims above 120 years old, but I see no reason not to mention notable "younger" claims that were once believed accurate. — JFG ^talk 11:15, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 18:00, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a tragic story and a wasted life in an institution but living to 102 is not that unusual. Legacypac (talk) 09:39, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Indeed a tragic story about a wasted life, but living to 102 and other people screwing up your age and then running wild with it for awhile do not make someone notable per WP:BIO1E. Newshunter12 (talk) 10:37, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete notable only for single criteria, similar to other few recently nominated subjects. Rzvas (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This might be worth a footnote in an article on the methods and problems of the Guiness Book of World Records, it is not worth including in an encyclopedia as a freestanding article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:13, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I don't believe this person is notable for her longevity. She is notable for being incorrectly label as world oldest person that is what the sources are saying. There are seems to be coverage regarding her forced institutionalization. Valoem ^talk ^contrib 18:32, 5 December 2018 (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.