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The result was keep, withdrawn. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:28, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lethia Sherman Hankins (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't understand why she is even notable. A civic leader and educator. She was black and ran for city council, not an unusual occurrence. scope_creepTalk 22:08, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:28, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I came to wikipedia through a project to improve the representation of women on wikipedia by creating biographies. Women--especially women of color--are historically underrepresented in political office and so I chose to add this woman because Black women politicians are relatively rare. Hankins won a national award for racial justice work, is one of a handful of African American women to serve on Wilmington's city council, and was involved in numerous social and community causes. Musehist (talk) 13:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Musehist[reply]

@Musehist: Post a note to the Women in Red project at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Women in Red and they be able to help. It will be posted up the maintenance lists, but may be missed. They may find a deeper meaning that can validate the article. They will certainly do a pile on if they think it is notable, which is a good things. I hope that helps. scope_creepTalk 13:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Musehist: I will post a note, make sure it happens. scope_creepTalk 13:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My experience with wikipedia has been one of editors suggesting women's lives are not notable enough; improving representation is a great project, and i'm glad that the Women in Red project exists. I am not sure I would have done the course I did if I knew that if would lead to me having to spend my time trying to convince people who don't have contextual knowledge that black woman politicians in the south are notable by their mere existence. So I appreciate your suggestions, and hope that someone else joins the conversation, but I think the deeper meaning is already clear. Musehist (talk) 13:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)musehist[reply]

Those two references don't denote notability. scope_creepTalk 22:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Those two seem like more than trivial mentions, and help verify one of her community leadership roles; even though they are not substantial, I think they contribute to WP:BASIC notability. Based on what has emerged so far, she appears to have had an impact that multiple independent and reliable sources have found worthy of notice over time. Beccaynr (talk) 22:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, Beccaynr. It is not acceptable to pull in all the stuff that is available and call it valid. There needs to be some kind bottom, and that is quality. A quality source that means something. Nothing that has been presented so far consistitutes notability. scope_creepTalk 11:25, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be case there is only one obit, which I can't access now. It doesn't seem to be independent. scope_creepTalk 11:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.