Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edna Cintron
- 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 and redirect to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (A–G). Salvio giuliano 15:52, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
Edna Cintron
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
Tragic, but not notable. Fails
WP:GNG. Was deprodded without valid rationale or improvement. Onel5969 TT me 22:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
]
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Women, and New York. Shellwood (talk) 22:52, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete Not meeting GNG. The sources used are about other things that "name drop" her. She wasn't notable before passing away; being a victim is sad, but nothing notable for our purposes here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. I found coverage of her last moments in ProQuest and added it in. Coverage of her also was occurring 5 years later and in 2016 (e.g. Daly, M. (2016). 15 years of donald trump's 9/11 lies, insults, and slights: The new yorker has a huge history of indifference and contempt for the darkest day in his city's history.) Article meets ]
- Keep per CT55555. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep. As CT55555 pointed out, she has received enough coverage for this history to be notable. // MitYehor (talk) 22:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Keep Surely, the page needs work, and should be improved, but as other users have pointed out, she clearly is notable enough to have a page. As such, I fundamentally disagree with the reasoning of Oaktree b and the OP.Historyday01 (talk) 03:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Delete per ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It would be very helpful if proposed references could be actually linked to and discussed, rather than handwaved toward.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 04:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Merge to any 9/11 related article per WP:BLP1E. All of the 3 criteria discussed in the guideline are met. First, Cintron is only discussed in terms of one event (9/11). Secondly, the person was a low-profile individual. She was not notable outside the attack. Thirdly, Cintron did not play a key role in the event nor was extensively covered. The proposed references barely mention Cintron, with best one being [1]. There should multiple sources like this to warrant a seperate article.
- Delete then Redirect to WP:WIKIVOICE in the main article, sourced to reddit and this book, which claims, inter alia, "The evidence proves that powerful Zionists ordered the 9/11 attacks". The NYT obit and the Independent obit can be added as references for her name at the redirect target. Beccaynr (talk) 02:42, 14 March 2023 (UTC)]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Comment: "Delete then redirect" is suggested by one editor above... huh? Why? Redirecting would preserve the substantial information in the article, and even if it stays as a redirect and is never expanded, that could facilitate future editing at the redirect target. I dunno, is the call in order to be mean and/or emphatic somehow, that one really really hates the information or something? One really wants to stamp it out, so that the next person arriving to create an article on the topic is at a further disadvantage?
- I am not sure whether the article, which is poignant, should be kept or not, but I OPPOSE "delete then redirect" in the name of honesty and decency and respect for past, current, and future editors. --Doncram (talk,contribs) 08:08, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- I had hoped the source analysis helped explain why preserving the independent and reliable sources (i.e. the NYT and Independent obits as links at the redirect target) and deleting this article seems best for the encyclopedia. Our the damage in the edit history appears to be beyond fixing, so deletion before a redirect seems appropriate for protecting the encyclopedia. Beccaynr (talk) 15:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC)]
- Delete or redirect to List of victims of the September 11 attacks (A–G). I agree with Beccaynr's handy analysis. Twinkle1990 (talk) 08:23, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
- 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.