Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Namila Benson

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. Despite a relist no keep argument made and delete votes are not superficial Spartaz ^Humbug! 09:02, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Namila Benson

[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)

Non-notable media person and author, fails WP:GNG and WP:AUTHOR (the latter assuming her main claim to fame is the book award nomination?). -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. While the subject is a working journalist and in that capacity has interviewed notable subjects, I cannot find any material to satisfy WP:JOURNALIST: she is not "widely cited by peers or successors" or "known for originating a significant new concept, theory, or technique". As far as I can find she is simply an ordinary journalist performing her job and accordingly fails GNG. Cabrils (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:54, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:16, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 22:28, 21 March 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.