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. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 17:54, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jeanine E. Jackson[edit]

Jeanine E. Jackson (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)

Per WP:GNG I do not think the current sources are "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent." She is an American diplomat, so American governmental websites are not the best way to establish her notability. Outside of these sources, I can only come up with brief mentions of her. I would certainly challenge anyone to find some significant coverage of her outside of her work. Jolly Ω Janner 04:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The point of GNG is to exclude stuff written by people (and their associates) who are otherwise of no significance; it's not meant to exclude reliable governmental sources (regardless of the coutnry) talking about major government officials. Ambassadors from major countries are important because of their international diplomacy, and they get coverage both at home and at the receiving nation. Have you checked the Burkinabe printed press? Having worked with the Liberian printed press a good deal, I can assure you that the typical US ambassador there (like the typical ambassador from other major countries) gets plenty of local coverage that never makes it online; the US being a major source of foreign aid, the ambassador routinely gets coverage in documentation (both news reports and secondary sources) regarding foreign-aid projects. Nyttend (talk) 13:02, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - if the subject of the page is indeed a US Ambassador, it seems highly unlikely that she is not going to be getting sufficient press and official government coverage to give notability. There is no requirement for there to be sources outside of her work, if that is how she is noted. JMWt (talk) 14:40, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment sufficient coverage (not fleeting mentions) in Burkinabe press would certainly make her claim to notability acceptable. However, we have no way of checking online and no sources used in the article to cite any such media. It would be rather speculative to to use this as a reason for inclusion. JMWt, I too thought it would be highly unlikely for a US ambassador to not receive sufficient press and official government coverage, but outside of the US ambassador office, there is nothing. It would appear as though being an ambassador isn't an automatic claim for an article. Jolly Ω Janner 18:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I have since been able to find this article by AllAfrica, which is dedicated to Jackson's tenure at Malawi. As it is not affiliated with the US embassy or foreign affairs, I'm satisfied that this scrapes past the line on notability. Jolly Ω Janner 19:08, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• AllAfrica actually doesn't write stuff: it's an aggregator for things published by African media organisations, including here the Malawi News Agency. This is a good example of the local coverage that US ambassadors to small countries routinely receive: while the diplomacy side of things is rather minor, and the ambassador's activities in general are rather minor from a US perspective (it's not like Washington's routinely negotiating major trade or international-security deals with Malawi or Burkina Faso), the possibility of US favor toward a small and poor nation is routinely enough to warrant the US ambassador being a major figure (both socially and in the media) in the receiving country. Nyttend (talk) 21:54, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - WP:POLOUTCOMES I have found sourcing: 2014 Congressional Directory pg. 605, Pg 30, 2010 Congressional Record, CIA's 2010 World Fact Book, 2015 CIA World Fact Book. — Maile (talk) 20:57, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Those source show that she exists, not that she is notable: "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention". After reading WP:POLOUTCOMES, I'm very doubtful that it is intended for ambassadors. Jolly Ω Janner 21:26, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I've gone back and forth here between Keep and Comment. I think I'm sticking with Keep. Of course those government links say she exists...as exactly who the article says she is - the Ambassador to Malawi. And I disagree with your argument. Ambassadorships are political appointments. That's our top person representing the United States wherever they are. She is notable. And government publications are not going to publish what amounts to news events or puff pieces unless something extraordinary happens. An ambassador doing their job in a country where nothing blows up and nothing makes the international news cycle, is still notable. And to your credit, your recent editing has improved this article. The Malawai Embassy website archived url you inserted yesterday nails notability. — Maile (talk) 12:22, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:09, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep United States governmental publications are generally considered reliable independent sources. Jackson did not create those publications.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:49, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Being an ambassador is inherently the same as reaching a notable position within the field of diplomacy. That there are additional sources that can help build the article is a benefit, especially if they are government sources (even if they are from the ambassador's government).--MarshalN20 ^Talk 17:11, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I added more sources and noticed that she comes up in Malawi news quite a bit (but I'm not sure which papers are RS). She passes GNG. She has also been awarded the Distinguished Honor Award. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:02, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Her position as ambassador from the U.S. is enough to make her meet notability requirements. The information presented by U.S. government publications about her are reliable. And I have found numerous others besides the U.S. government that simply need to be added to the article. This is the kind of article that needs a "help" banner, not a "delete" banner.VanEman (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2016 (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.