Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Indiana

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Indiana. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Indiana|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Indiana. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to US.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Indiana/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Indiana

Enchanted Hills, Indiana

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

OK, so this is something of a test case. This is unmistakably a suburban development, one of many built on the shores of Lake Barbie. It has been made a CDP, and this is making me reconsider our generally automatic inclusion of these, because except for one thing there seems to be no notability of this place in itself. That one thing, however, is that it was the location of the notorious-at-the-time Phillip Danner murder, which resulted in the youngest conviction of a child as an adult in Indiana history. (Unsurprisingly we do not appear to have an article on it, BLP nightmare that it is.) So, are these things enough to get the place over the notability hump? As an aside, one article on the case described Enchanted Hills as a neighborhood of Cromwell, which is questionable: there is some two miles of empty farmland between them. Mangoe (talk) 14:31, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 14:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It is a legally recognized place, as are all CDPs, and per Wikipedia community-wide consensus.Djflem (talk) 16:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus anymore that the phrase "legally-recognized place" means something definite; we have argued this out over and over. It seems to me that there is no dispute that incorporated places are legally-defined, but I for one do not agree that a statistical construct in the census counts as legal definition. CDPs exist simply because people ask the census for populations of areas without well-defined borders, so the census simply makes those borders up; but they have no legal status. A great many CDPs correspond to unincorporated cities and towns, but that is not always the case.

And really, that's the issue. Anyone looking at this on the ground or from the air can see that it is a big subdivision. So is it more notable than the many other such arrayed around Barbie Lake just because the census drew lines around it? I'm going to say, No. If this place "enjoys" any notice, it is because of the murder, not because of the census; and even then as a setting it is essentially irrelevant. NO, it's just another subdivision which we incidentally cannot tell the truth about because there's no actual not-needing-to-be-interpreted sourcing that says what it is. Mangoe (talk) 14:27, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bayfield, Indiana

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

A development slowly carved out of the swampy lake shore starting in the late 1950s: that's what both the tops and aerials say. I couldn't find any text documentation other than gazetteer listings and the like, and most hits were chance juxtapositions with the place in Wisconsin. Not seeing the notability. Mangoe (talk) 02:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A Google Books search for the name and the nearby lake turns up one limited-access source that names it on a map.[1] A name on a map is normally insufficient to establish notability (WP:NGEO). 2601:642:4F84:1590:54F6:DAE2:9787:ED0E (talk) 04:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jon Robert Cart

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

PROD deleted by the subject himself. Non-notable professor. No valid secondary sourcing: all press releases, interviews, or self-published. No in-depth article on the subject. I could not find a single scholarly article from the subject on Google scholar.

Additionally, Professor Cart has made numerous COI edits since 2007 ([2]), the subject was warned then under a different account and again today with his new account, ([3]). His workplace has policies in place dealing with conflicts of interest. Assuming good faith in this case is quite difficult. All academics know what a conflict of interest is. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 21:42, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and New Jersey. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 21:42, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and all of the citations are independent reliable sources. articles are published within my discipline in internationally renowned and juried articles. Robert Cart (talk) 22:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: user accounts Robert Cart and Ianbrowning, both of which edited this page, were confirmed to be the same user and were blocked for sockpuppetry - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robert Cart. Dorsetonian (talk) 06:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not true that all citations are independent sources: the last four are all by Cart himself. And there are other problems, for example: Montclair's website can only confirm he works there, it is not an independent source for his notability (footnote 1), or the notability of the concert on China (footnote 6); likewise the Network for New Music website is not an independent source for the notability of their concerts- let alone the notability of a single musician. UrielAcosta (talk) 00:14, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is harrassment. Please stop before I report it. Robert Cart (talk) 21:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: user accounts Robert Cart and Ianbrowning, both of which edited this page, were confirmed to be the same user and were blocked for sockpuppetry - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robert Cart. Dorsetonian (talk) 06:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While Mamani could definitely have been nicer, sending an article to AfD after a contested PROD is standard procedure and shouldn't be seen as harrassment. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Indiana. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:08, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Partially deleted discussion about how to post here

The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

My apologies, I see I added my comment for deletion below in the wrong way and it lacks a timestamp & a reply option, so if anybody knows how to add a reply button to it please do so. UrielAcosta (talk) 00:04, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can add a timestamp, and it should automatically be detected as comment syntax. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 00:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I've just deleted it & will repost it in the right format. UrielAcosta (talk) 00:33, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Being a professor with published work is not in itself automatically notable, see also my comments to the author/subject of the article above refuting his claim that all sources are independent. UrielAcosta (talk) 00:34, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

	Text generated by a large language model (LLM) or similar tool has been collapsed per Wikipedia guidelines requiring comments to originate with a human. LLM-generated arguments should be excluded from assessments of consensus.
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Jon Robert Cart meets multiple notability criteria under both WP:MUSICBIO and WP:PROF: 1. Musical Notability Cart has performed as a soloist at major venues including Carnegie Hall and the Kennedy Center, and his performances have been covered in reliable sources such as press releases from DePauw University and concert programs cited in university and arts institution media. He has premiered works by recognized composers including Gary Schocker, Jennifer Higdon, Edgar Girtain IV, and Sergi Cassanellas at international festivals (e.g., the Atlantic Music Festival and the American Cathedral in Paris). His discography includes solo recordings with labels such as Albany and Centaur Records, which document original interpretations and commissions. 2. Academic and Professional Standing Cart holds a Doctor of Musical Arts degree and has held long-term academic positions, including professor and former dean roles at accredited universities such as Montclair State University, Rowan University, and Shippensburg University. His leadership of the Marcel Moyse Society and international publications in peer-reviewed and trade journals (Pan, The Flutist Quarterly, The Babel Flute, Flöte aktuell) indicate a sustained contribution to his field. These meet notability guidelines under WP:PROF for leadership, publication, and impact. 3. Verifiable, Reliable Sources His work has been covered in university news outlets, performance programs, and interviews, and he has an extensive public record as an educator, performer, and recording artist. This includes documented appearances and faculty affiliations on institutional websites, liner notes, and recorded media. In sum, Jon Robert Cart’s biography satisfies the notability requirements for both musicians and academics. This article should be kept. Ianbrowning (talk) 22:13, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply] Note: user accounts Robert Cart and Ianbrowning, both of which edited this page, were confirmed to be the same user and were blocked for sockpuppetry - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robert Cart. Dorsetonian (talk) 06:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! This is your first edit here on Wikipedia – may I ask how you found this specific AfD? If Jon Robert Cart himself invited you to participate here, I invite you to look at why this isn't ideal. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 22:18, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ianbrowning, your comment appears to be AI generated based on its structure and language. Please see WP:LLMDISCLOSE Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 22:20, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless better RS can be found. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:35, 12 July 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Delete Although this is an autobiography, the subject probably did meet Wikipedia's inclusion criteria in 2008 when this was created. However, I do not see that WP:GNG, WP:MUSICBIO or WP:PROF in their current form are met. Dorsetonian (talk) 08:11, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for all the reasons that autobiography is discouraged: WP:COI, WP:OR, weak sourcing, risk to the Wikimedia Foundation's charitable status, meat puppetry, and sockpuppetry, all like a checklist of what not to do here. The use of LLM on pages here also endangers us, but from the other side of the law. Bearian (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Subject fails to fulfil the criteria of WP:NACADEMIC (and that's before taking into account the COI edits and sockpuppetry). — Arcaist ^(contr ^—talk) 09:46, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NPROF and lacks WP:THREE (on top of all the other problems). --hroest 18:25, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hilltown, Indiana

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

We've had some oddball things come up before, but this is the first one which may possibly be a complete, literal work of fiction. The maps/aerials are pretty inconclusive: maybe a vague agglomeration of houses along a road is a town, maybe not. But searching only produced one meaningful hit, which was this. It begins by saying that "The 200-seat Llamarada Theater in Hilltown, Indiana, unquestionably stands as one of the most well-documented small-town movie theaters of the early 1930s." And it goes on from the a bit further, but then the next paragraph begins, "The problem—or at least the apparent problem——is that the Llamarada Theater and Hilltown, Indiana, are fictional constructs, created by Margaret Weymouth Jackson for a series of five stories published in the Saturday Evening Post between August and October 1930." And this is all I got except for the usual passing references. Perhaps Jackson got a name off a map, but it's also possible that the name got put on the map because of her writing. If someone can find something substantive, well, it would be a help. Mangoe (talk) 18:22, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 18:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no concrete evidence of a town existing. ロドリゲス恭子 (talk) 19:08, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I am seeing a large number of newspaper articles on Hilltown between the 1860s and about 1914, when the community was considered defunct (or at least no longer a center of commerce). These articles include some history of the community; there are around 70, and I'm sifting through to see which ones will be most appropriate for the article. However, I have already begun work. Work will continue. Firsfron of Ronchester 04:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heat–Pacers rivalry

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

Looks like a ~~completely made up or~~ non notable rivalry based on these teams looking like "the best in the Eastern Conference" for 3 straight years in which Miami won all 3. Non Divisional, basically based on playoffs. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NRIVALRY. Delete or find an appropriate Redirect if it is notable enough for this. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, Florida, and Indiana. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment [4],[5],[6],[7],[8], [9]. It's not entirely cruft. Conyo14 (talk) 18:35, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Conyo14 I couldn't find it at 2 because I have apparently reached my free article limit despite not reading previously at all, I believe it is there. I would argue these articles basically talk about it when it being hyped as a heating up rivalry. There have been many sports rivalries that have worn down when they were regarded as future top rivalries. And these are basically articles around the time of the rivalry. I will let every editor make up their mind nonetheless. Thank you Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:51, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Something that helps is disabling JavaScript, but if it's extra pay-walled, perhaps someone else can provide a link. However, I will remain neutral on this topic, only providing links if I find them. Conyo14 (talk) 18:54, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't understand the statement in the nomination "Non Divisional, entirely based on playoffs." Notable rivalries can be based primarily or entirely on playoffs. One of the most notable rivalries in American sports has been the Yankees-Dodgers from the 1941 to the 1981 before they ever met in the regular season, and were never in the same division, let alone the same league. Another example, this time from basketball, is Celtics-Lakers. And this is clearly not "completely made up" given Conyo's sources. Unless there is a valid deletion rationale, I would say procedural keep. Rlendog (talk) 19:33, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Rlendog Honestly, yeah. It was bad wording by me that I got from other completely made up rivalries. Servite et contribuere (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coburg, Indiana

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

A rail spot with a farmtead next to it, and nothing else. Not a town. Mangoe (talk) 23:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -The subject does not seem to have sufficient sources to pass WP:V. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kvinnen (talk • contribs) 12:30, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana. Shellwood (talk) 23:37, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I was able to find another reference online. There may be more references offline that editors in the Valparaiso, Indiana area might have easier access to. Expansion would secure notability, but it remains unclear if that expansion can never happen. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 14:52, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I moved much of the content from this article into the Washington Township, Porter County, Indiana article. Royal Autumn Crest (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Well so uhmm Coburg does have some historical significance as a former postal and railway location (Correct), but the current sourcing is minimal and leaves questions about whether it qualifies as a notable community under WP:GEOLAND what i think can be done is if we can get additional offline or local historical sources that might help establish its notability. At this point, I see merit in either improving the article with stronger references or merging/redirecting it if expansion is not feasible.Icem4k (talk) 13:58, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I cannot find anything beyond the current sources in the article. Maybe, it's a good option to merge or redirect the page. Insillaciv (talk) 12:39, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To those considering a merge or redirect, please identify a specific target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 00:08, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Shirley Willard

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

WP:BLP of a local historian, not properly sourced as passing inclusion criteria for historians. As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they have or had jobs, and have to be shown to pass certain defined notability criteria supported by WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage about their work in media and/or books -- but this is referenced entirely to primary source content self-published by non-media organizations she was directly affiliated with, and shows absolutely no evidence of GNG-worthy sourcing at all. (For example, people do not become notable enough for Wikipedia articles by having staff profiles on the websites of their own employers, or contributor directories on the websites of publications that they wrote for — media unaffiliated with her work have to write about and analyze the significance of her work as news to make her notable on that basis.)
As her potential claim of notability is primarily local in nature rather than national, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to the necessary resources than I've got can actually find sufficient RS coverage to get her over the bar, but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have significantly better referencing than this. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, History, and United States of America. Bearcat (talk) 16:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indiana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:18, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: She did win awards, including a state-wide award for her work. WP:Author doesn't require national accomplishments. One might make the case that winning an award from the state's primary historical society might be "significant critical attention"? --
Jaireeodell (talk) 21:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say people always have to have nationalized accomplishments to be eligible for an article — I said that because her notability claim is local rather than national in nature, I lack access to the kind of resources necessary to determine whether the article is salvageable with better referencing or not on my own, without bringing it to wider attention. People can get into Wikipedia on primarily local significance — but regardless of whether their notability claim is local or national in scope, people aren't exempted from having to have WP:GNG-worthy reliable sourcing.
Also, every award that exists does not constitute an automatic notability freebie — a person is not automatically notable just because the article has the word "award" in it, if the article doesn't have GNG-worthy reliable sourcing in it. "Significant critical attention", for the purposes of GNG, is a question of whether she's had news reportage and/or books written about her and her work, not just the fact of having been singled out for just any old award that exists — an award might help if it could be referenced to a newspaper article treating "Shirley Willard wins award" as news, but it doesn't help if you have to depend on content self-published by the organization that gave her the award to source the statement because media coverage about the award doesn't exist. We're not just looking for "has done stuff", we're looking for "has had media coverage and/or books written and published about the stuff she did". Bearcat (talk) 16:25, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. ミラP@Miraclepine 21:59, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wonderful woman, no doubt, but I simply cannot find any of her writings that aren't "self-published" - i.e. by the historical society she was working with in some capacity. Keep Based on improvements and convincing arguments here. She did get two awards from the Indiana Historical Society, but I don't think that is going to confirm notability. She is given credit for unearthing the story of this "Trail of Death" but I only find a very few mentions of it by folks not directly associated with the historical society. Lamona (talk) 16:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just asking for clarification on what you are asking for here- are you asking for the historical veracity of the Potawatomi Trail of Death? If so, there is already a Wikipedia article discussing its history. I am not writing that she was responsible for discovering it, she is just a historian who has taken important steps to preserve its memory in local history. Willard is responsible for the Trail of Courage festival and commemorative caravan, if that's what you meant. Here are some mentions of the Trail of Living Courage Festival and caravan from sources not associated with Willard or the Fulton County Historical Society:

https://www.dar.org/national-society/american-spirit-magazine/beacon-history-shirley-willard (Page dedicated to her on the Daughters of the American Revolution website, already in article)

https://www.southbendtribune.com/story/news/local/2018/09/13/caravan-to-trace-potawatomi-trail-of-death-from-rochester/45724091/ (News article about about Trail of Death commemorative caravan Willard organized)

https://www.in.gov/ibc/legacyprojects/3261.htm (entry on Indiana government website about the festival, already in article)

If these sources are satisfactory, I can start reworking the article around these and replace the Fulton Co. Historical Society ones. DeishaJ (talk) 14:22, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will look at these sources, but, no, I'm not asking about the trail of death. This article is about HER so we need sources about HER. Lamona (talk) 15:23, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some additional sources I've found:

https://www.carrollcountycomet.com/articles/historian-recognized-with-statewide-award/ (News article referencing her Lifetime Achievement award. I have contacted the Indiana Historical Society to see if they have any writings or press releases on her that would work as citations).

https://www.rochsent.com/willard-featured-on-publishers-blog/article_1ec925d0-4190-541b-9020-c01655ba74d8.html (Lists her history and achievements with the Fulton Co. Historical Society. Also mentions her Lifetime Achievement award and Golden Hoosier award, mentions her being a torch bearer in the Indiana Bicentennial Torch Relay. I have confirmed her participation, she is listed here under Fulton County. Link to the page of the Indiana government website I found the PDF on.

Additional sources for consideration:

https://www.potawatomi.org/blog/2016/09/28/chairman-barrett-honored-at-2016-trail-of-courage-festival/

https://www.potawatomi.org/blog/2017/06/27/indiana-declares-indian-day/

I will let others decide if these sources are good enough to work in this article, as they are technically blog posts. I will argue, though, that they are from the official Potawatomi tribe website. These sources mention Willard playing a key role in securing proclamations from Mike Pence and Eric Holcomb in recognition of the Trail of Death and establishing remembrance/heritage days. These might be notable additions to her article, but I am unsure if they would meet proper reference criteria. Is there any way to find good sources for these proclamations:

Mike Pence declaring Sept. 20, 2014 Potawatomi Trail of Death Remembrance Day

Eric Holcomb declaring April 22, 2017 Indiana Indian Day

Thanks!
DeishaJ (talk) 15:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generally, blog posts are not considered reliable because they are informal and lack a true editorial oversight. The DAR one is pretty good but may not be considered independent because she was a member of DAR and this is a "member profile." Press releases are never considered reliable sources because they are by definition promotional, and thus have a non-neutral point of view. I hope that others will weigh in on the awards. (I advise looking at the documents about those awards - unless you are already familiar with them.) Lamona (talk) 02:42, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:40, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, deletion looks likely, but at least a little more participation is needed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Since I have majorly overhauled the article from when it was originally nominated for deletion, I thought a rundown of my edits would be helpful to the discussion. Notable edits include:

-Major source overhaul: Added several Indiana newspaper articles, two book sources naming her, and replaced all blog sources. All sources that could be considered primary have been replaced except one, the Potawatomi Trail of Death Assn. webpage that states the year of its founding. I am currently looking for alternatives.

-Expansion of her career section: I have both expanded her career section and added a "notable contributions" section. The career section now lists more of her contributions to Indiana history and includes her official appointment as the Fulton County historian by the Indiana Historical Society and Indiana State Historical Bureau. The "notable contributions" section goes into her contributions to specific historical subjects. A major contribution includes establishing 80+ historical markers along the Potawatomi Trail of Death. I hope that these sections better outline her significance in Indiana history.

-Awards: I did end up adding her participation in the Indiana Bicentennial, I thought it was relevant since the torchbearers were selected by a state committee and represented individuals who demonstrated "exceptional public service" as a criteria.

Hopefully these edits do a good job of addressing the original issues with the article. I am still actively editing and will continue doing so unless the article is officially deleted. For more information, please see the article and its improved references section.

Many thanks,
DeishaJ (talk) 15:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Mostly per WP:PROF#C3 on the lifetime achievement award from the Indiana Historical Society, which as a 190+ year-old society passes the "significant society" test to me for possessing judgment about notability of scholars in their field. It is quite rare to have an article on someone whose work is mostly on local history without also having national-etc. level peer-reviewed publications, but she appears to be one of the few who do that. (Note also that the distinction between national and provincial/state level can be tricky with large countries -- Indiana has about the same population as Bulgaria, and we would probably accept a lifetime achievement award from the Bulgarian Historical Society as counting.) -- I came here planning to make the closing easier by casting for delete, but the sources in the article and keep arguments here persuaded me. (forgot to sign) - -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 19:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC) (originally 6 July 2025)[reply]
Weak keep With significant improvements to the article I'm inclined to !vote weak keep. In addition to NPROF#3 there are sources that support GNG including [10], [11], [12], [13]. Nnev66 (talk) 18:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:18, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletions (WP:PROD)