Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinice Mabansag

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 merge to Day of Eight Billion as an WP:ATD $Salvio giuliano$ 10:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vinice Mabansag

[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)

WP:BLP1E. Reliable sources have only covered this individual in the context of one event—her birth. She is less than five months old, and she remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual throughout her life. Moreover, the mere event of her birth is not something that would pass WP:NEVENT; it does not have a WP:LASTING impact nor does her birth have wide geographic scope. As such, this fails WP:BLP1E, and should be deleted per WP:DEL-REASON#9 for its existence violating our policy on the biographies of living persons. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Philippines. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 02:43, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Per nominator, topic fails BLP1E and has no SUSTAINED coverage. ––FormalDude (talk) 02:50, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 03:58, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I can find news coverage which have significant coverage from many newspapers from different countries and continents. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 05:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC) [reply]
- The argument presented here is that you can't find any sources that:

Cover the person in the context of something besides her birth, and
Prove her birth had a lasting effect/impact.

––FormalDude (talk) 05:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that we have significant coverage of her in the context of her birth from many newspapers across the world (though I will note that we do not have WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE; it appears to have been a blip in the news cycle). However, that coverage doesn't matter under WP:BLP1E unless it is in the context of multiple events. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 05:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I don't see why naming a literal infant in an article on the Day of 8 billion would be warranted; this is a low profile individual who should be treated as such. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 03:16, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge or Redirect: with Day of Eight Billion. 𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 08:13, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: Support merging with Day of Eight Billion just as the case of another Filipino symbolic baby with Day of Seven Billion.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 09:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per BLP concerns; merge if necessary, but I find it hard to justify linking to a few months old babe for any reason. SN54129 16:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There are likely c. 200 such "8 billionth baby" so I don't see any reason why this one should be considered more important than the others. --- Tito Pao (talk) 09:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Day of Eight Billion, do not delete. Fails WP:BLP1E per nom. SBKSPP (talk) 06:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:BLP1E. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:59, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Day of Eight Billion. Fails WP:BLP1E. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 04:11, 17 March 2023 (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.