Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hila Levy

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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 01:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hila Levy

[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)

It isn't clear that the subject meets

WP:TOOSOON. PROD was declined by the article creator. TJMSmith (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Levy meets the Academic criteria, plus the soruces cited are reliable even if they are from her employer (such as the United States Air Force) or her school (such as the United States Air Force Academy). Levy is also responsible for providing intelligence support for Joint Special Operations Air Component-Europe, managing 35 intelligence professionals supporting MC-130J Commando II and CV-22B Osprey flight operations. Plus she was honored by the Air Reserve Personnel Center as the HQ RIO top Individual Reservists of 2018. Tony the Marine (talk) 16:04, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @
  WP:N. I don't understand how supervising X number of spies and Y BIG-FNCY aeroplanes would be at all be relevent in assessing notability. – Joe (talk) 17:13, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Comment. I found this through the academic deletion sorting list but Levy hasn't worked as an academic. You can find her student papers at Oxford in Google Scholar on topics including penguins and human migration (some of them listing a USAF affiliation, so apparently the same person); they're well cited for student papers but not so exceptional in that regard that they pass
WP:PROF#C2. So if she is to be notable it will have to be through some other notability criterion. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:00, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. None of the cited sources are
WP:GNG. The claim that she meets the notability criteria for academics is a non-starter per Wikipedia talk:Notability (academics)#Rhodes scholar and, more to the point, the fact that she has never worked as an academic. I'm sure Levy has had a distinguished career in her field but seriously, when you find yourself padding a biography with paragraphs on her college grade point average and a term-by-term account of the courses she took at Oxford, it's a big clue that the coverage just isn't there. – Joe (talk) 17:26, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete indepdence is a key to establishing usability of sources. Sourcing from an employer are not independent. We need independent sources to create articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:08, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Therefore you both are telling me that the "United States Air Force"; "Air Force Academy" and "Department of the Air Force" are not reliable sources? Well then, I guess with a little search hereyou all will find more then enough sources: [1]. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources are not independent because they are written by her employer. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Delete Fails to meet RS qualifications. And for the above remark...maybe better sourcing originally would have prevented this. Rhodes scholars coming out of the service academies isn't an unusual occurrence. The item listed as recognition isn't unusual, either. Sadly, not seeing anything notable. Intothat darkness 20:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A quick review of sources shows the section about her Rhodes scholarship time doesn't line up with the sources quoted. The USAFA press release doesn't mention her Oxford advisor at all (or the very specific course of study discussed in that paragraph), nor does it discuss the unsourced paragraph about her actual time at Oxford. There's also no mention in the article of her stated goal of attending medical school (mentioned prominently in two of the sources used). I just got done cleaning up an article like this and have no desire to take on another, but the lack of quality sources (or accurate use of the sources used) is disturbing. Intothat darkness 21:49, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Notability not achieved. The sources are just puff from her employer. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:35, 22 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. Not for
WP:PROF which she does not pass but by GNG. Three independent sources covering the notability of her accomplishments. The dismissal of being the first Puerto Rican to receive a Rhodes scholarship on WP:PROF was shocking to me. Overcoming major glass ceilings is often newsworthy, as two of the three sources attest to. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 00:13, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment I found a local news profile that could help revise the article, although it is written by an author affiliated with the Civil Air Patrol: CAP Salutes First Rhodes Scholar on National Science Day (PoncaCityNow, 2021), what appears to be a quote/biographical information: Religious Intolerance Alleged at Military Academy (ABC News, 2006), BBC News reporter commentary mentioning Levy in the context of her work with penguins: What I discovered filming penguins in Antarctic's icy wilderness (DailyO, 2016), a BBC Inside Science show with the same reporter who "installed new cameras with Dr Tom Hart and collected guano with Hila Levy," and this: Intelligence officer finds research is for the birds (Air Force Reserve Command, 2016). Beccaynr (talk) 00:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The CAP article doesn't add anything that isn't already in one of the existing sources (#5 on the existing list...another CAP publication). And if her main notability stems from her penguin research (it does seem to compose all her locatable publications), maybe the article should be reworked to focus on that (although I still remain doubtful of notability) instead of the hazy details of her military service. Intothat darkness 01:40, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have spent some time looking for sources, and per
WP:GNG in the future. Beccaynr (talk) 17:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS to meet
WP:GNG or any specific notability guideline, yet another thinly-sourced "first Puerto Rican to do something" page by its creator. Mztourist (talk) 03:13, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete v little coverage apart from press releases from employer Bumbubookworm (talk) 13:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly fails
WP:GNG. --hroest 01:50, 27 March 2021 (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.