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. Cirt (talk) 14:11, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Contested PROD. Non notable person. Jenuk1985 | Talk 13:51, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please check the external link, polish wikipedia and added reference to a book. I understand that wikipedia articles are not necessarily dependent on things like fame, importance, or popularity which is considered to be secondary and that people on wikipedia are notable if they are significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded. I will add further sources, published works of poetry for instance and further articles depicting biography. I do not agree with deletion, rather for clean up. Please reconsider. --TRIX312 (talk) 14:07, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete presence on another wiki is not sufficient justification for keeping it here. A reference in a single book just isn't going to do it. I'm not finding the kind of significant coverage that WP:BIO requires.--RadioFan (talk) 14:24, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I don't see the notability. I might be in the minority, but I don't think that notability should automatically transfer from one Wikipedia to another. I think that the "big fish on a small pond" principle can apply at times. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have cleaned the text up a little. I still do not see the reason why this person is not notable on the english wiki. I was intending to translate some texts in order to expand the wikipedia project because I believed it would be of use. Perhaps not everyone agrees but in any case I do not understand why there are still texts about people on wikipedia which are a few lines long and are considered notable. I do not believe that each "notability should automatically transfer from one Wikipedia to another." but in this case I do not see that big of a problem. Cheers.--TRIX312 (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not familiar with the polish wikipedia but I suspect it has similar notability standards. This article probably isn't notable there either unless there are some references that were not transwikied for some reason.--RadioFan (talk) 20:25, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. She doesn't seem to have much in terms of claims to notability, other then being a centenarian. As a nun she doesn't seem to have held any notable posts or did anything of note... She is almost unknown to Google (9 hits out of which most are wiki mirrors) and briefly mentioned in one books; a a centenarian she received a little publicity in Poland upon her death, in low key Christian press. A borderline case for notability at best. I am going to nominate her for deletion on pl wiki and see how it goes, maybe somebody there will offer convincing arguments for her notability that we are missing? PS. Nominated for Polish AfD.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:53, 29 June 2009 (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.