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 keep. Closing early per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) power~enwiki (π, ν) 04:00, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sister Jean Dolores-Schmidt[edit]

Sister Jean Dolores-Schmidt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Non-notable 98 year old nun with some sports connection. My attemp to redirect was reverted. Legacypac (talk) 23:29, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment She's received a ton of coverage this week from major organizations which probably passes WP:GNG but could also fall short of WP:NOTNEWS or WP:TOOSOON. I'm a non-vote here, but I'd lean keep. SportingFlyer talk 02:29, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:03, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:04, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Can't see anything beyond local notability and human interest stories. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment There's been decent local coverage of her before March Madness this year: [1] [2] [3] This won't pass GNG, but shows she's been notable within that community a long time: [4] SportingFlyer talk 05:18, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:07, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Decent local coverage before hand, but now has a ton of coverage from major organizations and thus probably passes WP:GNG, with examples here, here, and here. If we do keep this, it will need to be expanded. --DTM9025 (talk) 04:33, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep very substantial coverage in reliable independent sources over many years. FloridaArmy (talk) 13:35, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe she is a notable nun with more than some sports connection, Chaplain to the men's basketball team for 27 Years, making her the longest Tenured person in Loyola Basketball program History. Plus there head Coach has a page , I believe this makes her more famous than the head coach of Loyola. She also has been an academic advisor, campus minister on LSC and WTC and to Regis Hall residents since 1991 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wwdamron (talk • contribs) 14:29, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

None of which make her at all notable outside Loyola University. We have deleted articles on far more notable people than her. At the end of the day, if she wasn't American we wouldn't even be having a debate. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thr substantial coverage in reliable independent sources makes her notable. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:37, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If we've deleted articles on far more notable people, then perhaps our bar on notability is too high. I've seen this happen a lot where articles on subjects that a lot of people know and care about get deleted due to someone selectively declaring it isn't notable on a selective view of notability, especially if the subject is mainly notable in countries outside the U.S. or doesn't have a big online presence (which is not the end all be all) despite being very wide spread. --DTM9025 (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. She's notable and significant. Where are the Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red people to defend this bio? – Athaenara ✉ 15:06, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Since she's a nun I think WikiProject Women in Black would be more apropros yuk yuk.– Lionel^(talk) 02:39, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Deletion tools aren't necessary here. Sister Jean absolutely merits a mention somewhere. She's secured her place in basketball lore, and sources are abundant. We could talk about a merge, but I think this material is fine where it is, rather than trying to cram it into another article. This is a great effort for a brand new user, who hopefully hasn't been scared off from contributing further. (Full disclosure: I went to Loyola!) Zagalejo^^^ 00:39, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. National media coverage sufficient to establish notability. —Lowellian (reply) 05:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - A quick Google search shows multiple national (even international) newspapers talking about the topic.Nova Crystallis (Talk) 18:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Tons of national notoriety. She's the most recognizable star of March Madness this year. Vjmlhds (talk) 21:21, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I found this 2013 article by the Chicago Tribune profiling Sister Jean. Its existence invalidates the WP:ONEEVENT argument. Arbor to SJ (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - major media coverage extended prior in time to the current notoriety. Bearian (talk) 01:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Enough articles over the years that seems justified. NapalmSunday (talk) 03:40, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's extremely rare for me to comment on AfDs that are overwhelmingly so one sided. To be honest, I was a bit on the fence about this one initially. I knew nothing of the subject, but found some additional bits of information which I added a few days ago. I've been following this AfD and additions to the article. It's very clear at this point that she surpasses any concerns regarding WP:BLP1E, as her notability has sustained for some years now. What brings me to comment now, at this late point in the AfD and with it overwhelmingly keep, is this article. This article notes that in the first two weeks of the tourney Sister Jean was the most tweeted about person, and the most mentioned in any news articles of anyone in the tournament (>20,000 stories mentioning her). As Coy Wire said in this interview, Sister Jean is a celebrity. For her to have only a mention (if that) at Loyola Ramblers men's basketball belies the fame she has attained in her own right. The spotlight is certainly brighter now than it ever has been, but it was most decidedly on before this tournament. --Hammersoft (talk) 15:14, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep She definitely is notable enough for her own article. She has received coverage from ESPN and CNN. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable enough, well sourced, well covered before the Big 4. --TDKR Chicago 101 (talk) 22:07, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It is very notable article, well sourced, and meets Biography of Living Persons policy. Felicia (talk) 23:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - enough WP:RSs to assure notability. L293D (☎ • ✎) 02:30, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: ample in depth coverage to satisfy WP:N. – Lionel^(talk) 02:34, 27 March 2018 (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.