Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annie Moore (immigrant)

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 17:47, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Annie Moore (immigrant)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:BIO1E and WP:GNG. Suggesting merge into the Ellis Island article. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 21:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ireland and New York. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 21:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:48, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Same as Arne.Per nom, to Ellis Island. Potentially notable subject, but as written the sourcing is inadequate to meet notability for WP: GNG. NiklausGerard (talk) 22:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. While I can understand why the nominator refers to BIO1E, I personally don't understand either of these arguments. In terms of "as written the sourcing is inadequate", it is worth noting that notability discussions are not based on the content or the sourcing in the article (at time of nom). But on the sourcing available to support the article/claim (outside this project). In terms of "same as Arne", it is worth noting that Moore is represented in several statues, a number of books (granted several fictionalised), a number of things "named after her" (from software programs to awards to "sponsorship levels" of the Statue of Liberty - Ellis Island Foundation), a significant volume of news coverage, etc. The subjects are not equivalent. Guliolopez (talk) 03:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Arne Pettersen has also been nominated for deletion, and the article currently includes a reference to a website titled "stuffnobodycaresabout.com". Beccaynr (talk) 03:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I had seen that other AfD nomination. But I don't see how its relevant myself. Or how "the article on X is nominated for deletion, and so therefore should the article on Y" isn't an example of an WP:OSE argument. Anyway, I've offered my own (hopefully policy-based) opinion below. I'll shut up now :) Guliolopez (talk) 04:04, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:NEXIST and WP:GNG, e.g. Remembering Annie Moore, Ellis Island’s First Immigrant (History.com), Annie Moore, the first immigrant at Ellis Island (Coshocton Tribune, 2017), Generation saga: Relatives of Annie Moore traced (Irish Times, 2016), The Cork girl who was first through Ellis Island’s gates (Irish Times, 2017), Immigrant Number One (New York, 2010), A Tip Of The Hat To Annie Moore (CBS News, 1999), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Takes Delivery of USNPS "ANNIE MOORE" to Serve Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty (Business Wire/Yahoo, 2021), First Ellis Island Immigrant Gets Buried Over a Century Later (Gothamist, citing NY Daily News, 2008), Life of First Ellis Island Immigrant Revealed (NPR, 2006), Iconic emigré Annie Moore had roots in North Cork (Independent.ie, 2016), Annie Moore and the archives of displacement: Towards an immigrant history of the present (Social & Cultural Geography, 2004), The Story We Don’t Talk About: On Irishness, Immigration, and Race (Literary Hub, 2018). These sources also help show WP:BIO1E does not apply, because the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one that has been covered in a variety of ways over time. The volume and depth of coverage available also appears to make it unsuitable for a merge into an article where she is mentioned, because a separate article is warranted and a merged article would be too long or "clunky". Beccaynr (talk) 23:28, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 02:18, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While I understand the inclination to point to BIO1E here ("subject is primarily notable for one thing"), as noted in WP:BIO1E itself (as also highlighted by Beccaynr), where the "event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate". This is absolutely the case here. As indicated by the significant volume of coverage of the subject (and several statues and any number of books and the like). A subsection or footnote in the Ellis Island (or anywhere else for that matter) would be a misrepresentation of the significance assigned by the sources/coverage/etc. Mine is a firm "keep" recommendation. Guliolopez (talk) 02:21, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per @Guliolopez. It is clear that there has been sustained historical interest in Moore. RoanokeVirginia (talk) 14:10, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This AfD was not removed from the previous log page when it was relisted, and it should not have been relisted in the first place. @Fakescientist8000: Relisting is only for older nominations that have not reached a consensus, and should never be done by the nominator. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 04:22, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, it was my first time using the 'relist' tool. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 17:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, while I do see your point of WP:1E, I think WP:NOT1E applies here as it fails the third criteria, I think the event is significant enough to warrant her own article. Her legacy is impactful as noted in the Legacy section of the article. Heart ^(talk) 04:51, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I see four books written about her, I see a statue built to her. The plaque on the statue is in a public place and could be used as a source. BLP1E does not apply for two reasons. 1 - BLP1E is part of BLP and BLP is about living people. She is dead. So I don't think it is applicable. Even if it was applicable, the books are written about her life, not just her arrival, additionally even if you didn't accept those points, she is notable for her arrival and then for someone making a statue, two separate events. Coverage is WP:SUSTAINED. CT55555 (talk) 13:08, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
However, I never claimed to use BLP1E, I pointed towards BIO1E. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 17:16, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination withdrawn. I have seen your arguments, folks, and have come to the conclusion that Annie Moore is notable enough beyond WP:BIO1E to be on Wikipedia. My apologies. Cheers! Fake scientist 8000 17:20, 16 April 2022 (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.