Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Houghton: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
note
flagging an editor in the hope that...
Line 26: Line 26:
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America|list of United States of America-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:GSS-1987|<span style="font-family: monospace;font-weight: bold;font-size: 16px;color: hsl(205, 98%, 55%); ">GSS</span>]] ([[User talk:GSS-1987|talk]]) 11:18, 13 September 2016 (UTC)</small>
:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/United States of America|list of United States of America-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:GSS-1987|<span style="font-family: monospace;font-weight: bold;font-size: 16px;color: hsl(205, 98%, 55%); ">GSS</span>]] ([[User talk:GSS-1987|talk]]) 11:18, 13 September 2016 (UTC)</small>
*copying my comments from [[Talk:Mary Houghton]] here, My point about Houghton meriting an article has to do with the fact that people who were well known 2 or 3 decades ago sometimes get deleted simply because too few editors have access to newspaper archives, whereas contemporary notables are easy to source. I may or may not be able to make time to go back and take a more careful look at Houghton, source, and improve her article but I certainly saw enough to think that someone definitely should do so (or, do some good archive searches before recommending deletion.)[[User:E.M.Gregory|E.M.Gregory]] ([[User talk:E.M.Gregory|talk]]) 00:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
*copying my comments from [[Talk:Mary Houghton]] here, My point about Houghton meriting an article has to do with the fact that people who were well known 2 or 3 decades ago sometimes get deleted simply because too few editors have access to newspaper archives, whereas contemporary notables are easy to source. I may or may not be able to make time to go back and take a more careful look at Houghton, source, and improve her article but I certainly saw enough to think that someone definitely should do so (or, do some good archive searches before recommending deletion.)[[User:E.M.Gregory|E.M.Gregory]] ([[User talk:E.M.Gregory|talk]]) 00:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
*{{ping|Megalibrarygirl}} on the chance that you have a moment to look at this 1980s Chicago banker.[[User:E.M.Gregory|E.M.Gregory]] ([[User talk:E.M.Gregory|talk]]) 00:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:54, 14 September 2016

Mary Houghton (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)

No reliable secondary sources, independent of the subject, which provide significant coverage, fails GNG and WP:BIO. Unable to determine if this also still a living person. Notability is not inherited through association with a Nobel Peace Prize winner. This does not appear to be a notable person. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:01, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Music1201 talk 21:47, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Innovative bank spurs renewal of South Shore, Geranios, Nicholas K., Chicago Sun - Times 06 July 1986 [1]
  • BANKING ON A NEW PHILOSOPHY, ]

Gibson, Edie. Chicago Tribune, 16 Aug 1987 [2]

  • Investing in inner city // Chicago bank redefines role in community, : [FINAL Edition]

Wiseman, Paul. USA TODAY [McLean, Va] 08 Jan 1993 [3]

  • 'DO-GOODERS' AT BANK REVITALIZE CHICAGO'S SOUTH NEIGHBORHOOD,

Geranios, Nicholas K. above was picked up by the Boston Globe 05 July 1986 Lots more article on Houghton and her role at this bank and in this neighborhood. I am sure that other archive searches will have similar. Keep.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:24, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • With all due respect, all of the links provided go to an empty ProQuest Log In page. Steve Quinn (talk) 01:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • She appears to get only passing mention here [4] "The New Old-Fashioned Banking". R. Grzywinski. Harvard Law Review. 1991.
  • Normally I don't provide a link for searches, but here is a relevant Google Newspaper search [5]. All I am seeing is her being quoted in an entire news story or passing mention in an entire news story. If someone can find a few articles that cover her specifically, then that would be good. Sorry to say, I don't have the time to go through many of these. But I support the effort by anyone else. ----Steve Quinn (talk)
User:Steve Quinn, an alternative way to support the effort,, is to withdraw your nomination and just leave the page togged for improvement.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:41, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proquest Newspapers is behind a paywall; it is easier to use this paywalled archive when looking from material form the 1980s, 90s. Those articles and the many others found in that archive are valid sources for WP and AFD, and would readily enable an editor to write a good article on Houghton. Non-paywalled searches on topics form a generation ago can take a little longer, but produce material like this form the Chicago Tribune, "South Shore Bank Spreading Its Creed," May 30, 1988|By R.C. Longworth. [6]. We need an article on South Shore Bank, and one on Chicago Mary Houghton. 2 notable topics.E.M.Gregory (talk) 09:53, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note User:Steve Quinn discovered that "South Shore Bank" is now called ShoreBank, and has an article.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@E.M.Gregory: I was thinking the same - that we need an article on South Shore Bank. Please go to this article's talk page, I have some ideas I'd like you take a look at. Steve Quinn (talk) 00:17, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 11:18, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. GSS (talk) 11:18, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • copying my comments from Talk:Mary Houghton here, My point about Houghton meriting an article has to do with the fact that people who were well known 2 or 3 decades ago sometimes get deleted simply because too few editors have access to newspaper archives, whereas contemporary notables are easy to source. I may or may not be able to make time to go back and take a more careful look at Houghton, source, and improve her article but I certainly saw enough to think that someone definitely should do so (or, do some good archive searches before recommending deletion.)E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Megalibrarygirl: on the chance that you have a moment to look at this 1980s Chicago banker.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]