Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alma Soller McLay

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. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 17:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alma Soller McLay

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

Delete: no grounds for notability proferred; article is comprised of only one-sentence which is laden with POV. Quis separabit? 23:34, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In what way was "a key figure in the documenting of Nazi atrocities during the Holocaust" POV? Surely you don't deny that they committed atrocities? The Times obituary is headed "documented the full extent of the Nazis’ crimes against humanity". There was also a clear assertion of notability. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:16, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 23:55, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I have reworded the sentence to be less biased. Admittedly, there aren't that many reliable independent sources covering her. That said, I think being a member (and, in fact, the last surviving one before her death) of the team that prosecuted Nazi war criminals at Nuremberg is notable, and that the sources in the article further bolster her notability. Everymorning (talk) 00:05, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Received obituaries in The Times, The Post-Journal, and Los Angeles Times indicating her significance and international recognition. Passes GNG. Philafrenzy (talk) 00:21, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As Philafrenzy says, news obits in major media like The Times and the Los Angeles Times is a standard demonstration of notability. --Arxiloxos (talk) 01:09, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:30, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

She was responsible for "compiling the official U.S. record of the trials". No offense, but that sounds like clerical/secretarial work. The article should be redirected to an appropriate target and any salient info added manually unless there's more stuff to add to the article as it is. Quis separabit? 17:39, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It clearly wasn't just routine clerical work or she would not have received three obituaries in reputable papers. Those papers have exercised their editorial judgement and decided she was worth writing about. There any number of other deceased people they could have written about. They chose her because they thought her work was significant. Philafrenzy (talk) 18:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - While the L.A. Times is a local paper for Soller McClay, publishing an in depth, edited obituary certainly counts as a reliable source. Smmurphy^(Talk) 19:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:59, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete - She is not notable herself, but the team she worked with was notable and had notable members. Notability isn't transferable per WP:INVALIDBIO: "relationships do not confer notability." Even the sources that appears to be about her are really about the team she was a part of: most of them contained at least as much about U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson as they did her. She can't only notable because she *happened* to be the last one to die from Jackson's team. At most she should have mention in Nuremberg trials for her role. - GretLomborg (talk) 04:01, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- per obits in The Times, The Post-Journal, and Los Angeles Times. An acceptable and suitably referenced stub at this point. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:33, 17 June 2017 (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.