Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tava Colo

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. ✗plicit 13:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Tava Colo

[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)

There is no automatic notability for supercentenarians. Barring that, does not meet WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:10, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 04:09, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ^{Engr. Smitty Werben} 04:09, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Like the last time (with another supercentenarian), being one does not guarantee subject's notability.--Melaleuca alternifolia | talk 21:27, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously nominated via WP:PROD, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:34, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: No significant reliable, independent sources establishing general notability exists. Multi7001 (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG Not notable enough to justify a Wikipedia article and there is not significant coverage.RamotHacker (talk) 21:35, 4 September 2021 (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.