Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Morningstar

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:39, 11 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Helen Morningstar

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

Geologist lacking significant coverage in reliable sources. Also, the page doesn't establish any sort of notability. Meatsgains (talk) 21:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:21, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Subject fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:GNG, and WP:PROF. Had she been a fellow of the National Academy of Sciences it'd be slam-dunk for PROF, but she was elected a fellow of the Ohio Academy of Science. She was a dues-paying member of AAAS, not a fellow. I can't find enough documents about her to presume notability. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

Geologist Helen Morningstar membership to AAAS and the National Academy of Sciences is listed under her married name and not maiden name. Helen Morningstar Lamborn, Fellow of Section C. Included in the Ohio Academy of Science Membership List 1940 and the Annual Report of the Ohio Academy of Science 1952, page 235 url=https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/3954/v52n04_229.pdf?sequence=1 tjwigmor (talk) 23:13, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tjwigmor: You are mistaken. That's the single source provided in the article, I read it, and my assertions stand. Neither the National Academy of Sciences nor the AAAS lists her as a fellow. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:30, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tjwigmor:The source you cite refers to her being a "Fellow of the Academy of Science". Taken in the context of the source itself being an annual report of the Ohio Academy of Science, it seems clear that the source refers to her being a Fellow of the Ohio Academy of Science rather than an elected member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. I don't believe we have any sources indicating that she was the latter, and it is unlikely to have been the case. It also does seem that she was an ordinary dues paying member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science rather than an elected Fellow of AAAS. Nsk92 (talk) 23:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete we lack evidence that she meets any academic notability criteria. If it could be shown she was an elected fellow of a sufficiently notable society this would change, but we need a source that shows this to keep the article, which we do not have at present.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:31, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, sadly. It is wonderful to know about women scientists from that time, but she does not meet academic notability and there doesn't seem to be any in depth material published about her. tjwigmor, see this page in your course materials. Articles need to be about people who are already well-known as demonstrated by "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." StarryGrandma (talk) 02:19, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
delete I cannot see a claim of importance. On line search show up the sellers of publications she wrote, and an occasional citation. But nothing beyond a passing mention. Her name could get a mention in an article on Ohio Academy of Science. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 22:36, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all said above, fails WP:NACADEMIC and WP:GNG. jcc (tea and biscuits) 16:22, 11 November 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.