Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julia Bodina

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 redirect to Julia Urania. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This AFD closure was contested and I did opt for the redirect option that was proposed. But the consensus is to Delete so I'm altering my closure. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Julia Bodina

[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)

Obscure freed slave that fails WP:GNG. Article cites no reliable sources, and none of the online sources I found show sigcov. Deprodded without explanation by Ficaia: perhaps he can explain why? Avilich (talk) 01:45, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and History. Avilich (talk) 01:45, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Might be worth redirecting to Julia Urania, as Julia Bodina is mentioned prominently there. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 01:54, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that article is appreciably closer to WP:GNG than this one. It's longer, sure, but... -- asilvering (talk) 04:25, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not sure why we need an article on a slave from ancient Rome, sourced from an inscription somewhere. That's the reliable source? Oaktree b (talk) 03:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

the one cited in the article is a SPS, but yes, all I found is a few other sources simply mentioning it. Avilich (talk) 03:50, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only information we have is a funeral inscription. I can give you RS for that, but it doesn't change the fact that we have a funeral inscription and nothing else. See pg 318 here: [1]. I can get a hold of a copy of the book that is citing if anyone really wants it (or if they want to do a WP:BEFORE on Julia Urania), but I don't see how it would be necessary. -- asilvering (talk) 04:38, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to ~~Julia Urania. If that article gets AfD'd too, then so be it. But it's not up for AfD atm.~~ Drusilla of Mauretania the Younger 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 03:01, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because she seems not notable and there is an absence of citations. CT55555 (talk) 12:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:51, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Julia Urania, as Bodina's claim to notability is as the provider of evidence about the latter, a Queen. PamD 08:00, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do not keep -- A freedwoman is unlikely to be notable. No objection to some merge/redirect. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not everyone who had a funeral insription found be archeologists is notable. That is the standard we would need to employ to justify keeping this article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:24, 25 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.