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. Drmies (talk) 03:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Augustine Tessier (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)

The subject of this article to meet the standards of WP:N due to lack of multiple, non-trivial references in reliable, third-party sources. The fact that she was World's Oldest Person in and of itself is irrelevant for determining if she should have a stand-alone article, since there's no Wikipedia policy on the oldest anything being automatically notable by the encyclopedia's standards (also based on long-term consensus, including most recently the redirecting of this World's oldest person). Thus we default to the general notability guidelines and any material of encyclopedic merit can be included on the many longevity-related lists on Wikipedia. Canadian Paul 18:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She stands out more than the other ones....She was the oldest nun ever, at time of death, was oldest French person ever recorded, etc. She's most certainly notable for holding four longevity titles at time of death - Oldest nun ever, oldest Frenchwoman ever, oldest living person, and oldest living woman. DN-boards1 (talk) 18:16, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

— Note to closing admin: DN-boards1 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD.

None of which grants her notability based on Wikipedia's criteria. Canadian Paul 18:28, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

How is the oldest nun ever not notable? DN-boards1 (talk) 18:29, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because Wikipedia does not have a criteria that declares that the oldest nun ever is automatically notable. Canadian Paul 18:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As per WP:Notability (people): People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 19:23, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

She's no longer the oldest nun ever, it seems someone has beaten her at that: [1]. But still, there she is in GWR. DN-boards1 (talk) 19:44, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nuns should beat schoolchildren, not one another. EEng (talk) 14:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 22:06, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete First, the GRG's gallery is not evidence of notability as I'd argue the gallery page is not a reliable source. We've agreed on table E but if their unverified listings aren't sufficient, the text on that page without any indication of where it came from is not going to be a reliable source. Second, being the oldest person in the world is not sufficient for notability. Also consider the world's oldest Scottish man (and 2nd oldest UK man) was not sufficient, and the editors there noted that simply having obituaries is WP:ROUTINE coverage so more is needed that that. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 01:33, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete "She was at the time of her death the oldest nun ever recorded" -- trivia, not notability. EEng (talk) 14:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Oldest people#Chronological list of the verified oldest living person since 1955 NewYorkActuary (talk) 23:30, 16 October 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.