Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Shaw (healthcare administrator)

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. Nakon 00:15, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Caroline Shaw (healthcare administrator)

Caroline Shaw (healthcare administrator) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable bureaucrat fails WP:BIO. (See also recently concluded Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Smart (healthcare administrator) for some tangential discussion.) Pax 22:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 22:38, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete To the extent she has been given an award, it is due to award inflation, not particular accomplishment. She has not done more than many other hospital administrators over the years. This article mainly just tends towards presentism in Wikipedia. She has not made significant impact. She was given a low level honor.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:13, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Holder of the CBE, which has always been held to satisfy the requirements of WP:ANYBIO #1 in previous AfDs. Nobody with such an award has ever been deleted to my knowledge. Very definitely not a "low-level honour" or due to "award inflation" (how insulting and ignorant is that?) in any shape or form. The highest honour below knighthood for which most people are eligible and only a few dozen are awarded every year. In actual fact, contrary to what some seem to believe, considerably fewer honours at this level are awarded now than were awarded in the past, so I really fail to see how this is award inflation (it is certainly true that many more OBEs and MBEs are awarded now, and we do not consider these alone to be evidence of notability, but these increased numbers do not apply to higher awards). Only those who have made a very significant contribution to their field would even be considered for an award at this level. Quite frankly, anyone who believes the CBE is insignificant clearly has absolutely zero knowledge of the British Honours System and should probably avoid looking foolish by commenting on it. See my answer to the nominator on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Smart (healthcare administrator). -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:44, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Awarded the CBE which is a very high level award in the British Honours System only awarded to someone who has made an incredible and significant contribution in their respective field. Jack1956 (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keeppp. Pax - needs to realise that when he clearly doesn't understand a subject and is being kindly schooled on that subject that it is extremely unbecoming (not to say potentially idiotic) to insist that one's teacher that he's wrong. Le petit fromage (talk) 23:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're !voting speedy keep here when you !voted delete in the Smart AfD? That's incongruous. (Aside from that, I would suggest remaining WP:CIVIL. Pax 19:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• • No, no, really, it's not, as has been explained to you multiple times now. It's not my fault you refuse to understand what is being explained to you. Le petit fromage (talk) 20:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Has it ever occurred to you that I have concluded you're wrong? I wasn't the only one to do so at the Smart AfD. Pax 04:07, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

a minority of two is hardly distinguishable from a minority of one and does not represent consensus (which has been explained to you now at length - see previous comment). Le petit fromage (talk) 07:56, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Smart article failed and was deleted. Obviously you did not enjoy consensus. Pax 23:55, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You have obviously failed to notice the significant difference: Smart doesn't have the CBE! There is therefore nothing inconsistent here. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Sources prove she is notable. AlbinoFerret 16:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - CBE (as opposed to MBE) is fairly good evidence of notability. Bearian (talk) 18:11, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply to those editors who keep pushing the CBE: As noted in the Tim Smart AfD discussion (also linked in the rationale), the CBE (as opposed to, say, a knighthood), is not a significant enough award to confer notability. (The fact that it is being routinely bestowed upon civil service bureaucrats without external notability is rather telling.) The subject's major accolade aside from the CBE, being 33rd highest paid manager is one bureaucracy, puts them lower on that list than Smart. Pax 19:34, 30 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's certainly not routinely conferred on anyone. Please try to understand that you really don't know what you're talking about here. In the Smart discussion, the only person who "noted" the CBE wasn't notable was you - and since Smart doesn't have one it wasn't relevant there in any case. The fact is that in every other AfD for someone with a CBE the article has been kept, usually on the principal basis that they have a CBE. It's your prerogative not to agree, but your rationale is incorrect and your opinion is not accepted by the Wikipedia community. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:55, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Question/Keep That she has a CBE seems enough. I read what Pax said and if it's true that the CBE has become meaningless then change my vote. What does external notability refer to? Can she not be notable for her bureaucratic work alone? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paperpencils (talk • contribs) 09:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What Pax says isn't true. He's been told is isn't true multiple times by multiple people. He's also been told why it isn't true multiple times by multiple people. Yet, he persists in claiming that he is right and everyone else is wrong. Le petit fromage (talk) 09:47, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're doing your level best to blank-out Mr. Lambert. Pax 03:19, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep A CBE should be enough, the rest of the article shows some other notability too. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:45, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• KeepWe have usually accepted CBE: It is MBE that we general do not seriously consider. (nor, usually OBE) She has been head of a major hospital trust, which is a position that has often been considered notable here. The head of a major service like that is not a routine civil servant. DGG ( talk ) 05:36, 2 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

CBE should be deprecated if over a hundred of them are being handed out every year (see Guardian link in prior comment), with >90% of them going to government barnacles. Pax 03:19, 3 April 2015 (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.