564:: "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability." Per GNG: ""Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." The article cites substantial coverage in
538:
many or most of them to have promotional and questionably sourced articles created about them. Tech.co doesn't appear to cover her at all - the only result on the site with her name is a listing of her name and company with no content. The CNN Business profile article is primarily an interview with her, relies heavily on direct quotations from her, and so is questionably independent - but it is also but one source, not enough to demonstrate significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources. So what is left?
330:
testing tool (the article pointed out by HouseOfChange). In regards to the Forbes reference, please note that Forbes "blog posts" by one of their many thousands of contributors (often paid for / sponsored) are not equivalent to Forbes 30 under 30 list which is staff verified and independent, hers is the latter and would qualify as reliable. The subject is also a recipient of a
754:, there appears to have been an issue transcluding this page to the AfD log; as far as I can tell, the discussion has only ever been listed for today January 22nd's log, which would explain why the admins that patrol AfD haven't closed it yet: it wasn't in the logs that they have been patrolling. If my assessment is correct, it actually
537:
Sure, but what's out there is seriously lacking. Coverage in Fast
Company is limited to a single paragraph in an article about the Thiel Fellowship. The Thiel Fellowship also doesn't automatically confer notability; though a few recipients are indeed notable, there seems to be a preponderance for
485:
In a given field, there are a few million "under-30s" working in it, the award honors the top 30 in each field. On its own, Forbes 30 under 30 is not enough for notability per WP standards, however, taken together with her CNN profile, news feature in Fast
Company, news feature in TechCo, and Theil
329:
I agree that her CNN featured article/profile is strong. Other existing sources include Fast company, and industry specialized publications, together provide strong evidence of notability based on ~4 being reliable sources. I also just added the
Toronto Guardian article that describes her COVID-19
246:
I'd like to revisit the previous AfD from a couple years ago. The promised improvements have not materialized, and this article remains promotional in tone. I am not sure that the sources relied upon for notability would be accepted today - Forbes 30 under 30 coverage, and a profile in a student
647:'s thoughts are welcomed but the accusation was unnecessary. FalconK seems to be a respected user with 17 years of editing experience here. Such accusations should include evidence or should be respectfully removed. The guidelines of Knowledge are to assume good faith.
483:"Reporters, editors and expert judges consider a variety of factors, including: funding, revenue, social impact, inventiveness and potential. Nominee shortlists are shared with each category's four-judge panel who select the final 30 listees in their assigned category."
433:
So that Forbes 30 under 30 thing is impressive? Got to admit it strikes me a bit dull tbh (half the world must be named in those lists by now - what are the Forbes criteria?), but happy to accept it if it is a legit 'thing'
215:
83:
737:
I'm also angry on this bias at some AfDs. Some AfD closure are biased. They will not close until we get more delete votes. How
Shameless admins. What is the community value of these AfDs?
534:
Agreed, that "Forbes 30 under 30" alone does not provide notability, but taken together with the other news and awards cited, I think from that there is a strong case for notability here.
777:
the script gave up mid-way and didn't re-transclude or add a tag to this discussion. The discussion was originally correctly transcluded for an entire week so it may be closed –
286:
176:
798:
Ok, I am convinced by the 30 under 30 thing (and look forward to finding the Forbes 80 under 80 list). Am a bit of newb but agree that leaving a vote open seems a bit wrong.
354:
Struggling to see how winning a prize as an undergrad and setting up a business is sufficiently notable to get you an encyclopedia entry. Agree about the promotional tone
209:
387:
306:
123:
108:
719:
Is there a reason why this AfD remains open, looks like 3+ weeks old, I thought the policy is that they are closed or relisted by admins after ~7 days?
78:
475:
247:
magazine of a school she attended (making the coverage dependent). That leaves a single profile in CNN; not enough to establish notability.
334:, one of the most prestigious startup awards for young people, for which there was significant press, she is included in as a recipient.
486:
fellowship news stories (more prestigious than Forbes)... together it strongly meets notability requirements with reliable sources.
501:
456:
414:
take a look at current article. Both 2018 and 2019 Forbes 30 under 30 (2 different categories) are by staff, not "contributors."
376:
580:
when she became a partner at Cervin. This degree of coverage meets WP:BASIC. Notability can and should be deduced from policy.
103:
96:
17:
807:
786:
769:
746:
728:
707:
678:
656:
631:
617:
589:
547:
520:
505:
443:
423:
399:
363:
343:
318:
298:
277:
256:
63:
149:
144:
758:
be closed until the 29th, when it's been properly listed for at least a week, at which point it can be closed normally.
230:
153:
511:
A search for "Forbes 30 under 30" lists in AfD will show that we do not generally assume notability based upon them.
197:
117:
113:
803:
452:
439:
372:
359:
266:
136:
828:
627:
543:
516:
314:
294:
252:
40:
265:
The three sources mentioned by nom seem to me to establish notability. Tie also seems to continue in business:
669:
I really Sorry to FalconK. I'm misunderstanding you because you are only puting AFD on many businesspersons.
476:
https://www.irishtimes.com/business/innovation/six-irish-people-included-on-forbes-30-under-30-list-1.4205031
703:
585:
419:
273:
191:
474:
It is widely considered to be very prestigious, the selection of recipients makes national news (example:
824:
799:
724:
652:
497:
448:
435:
395:
368:
355:
339:
36:
187:
783:
742:
674:
623:
613:
539:
512:
489:
310:
290:
248:
223:
699:
581:
415:
269:
237:
92:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
823:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
720:
648:
493:
391:
335:
331:
751:
738:
670:
644:
609:
602:
561:
779:
203:
140:
762:
695:
598:
411:
56:
601:, and plenty of significant coverage both included in the article and per search.
479:
170:
774:
This was apparently due to a hiccup with the relisting script, during re-listing
267:
https://torontoguardian.com/2020/04/19check-com-covid-19-health-assessment-tool/
132:
69:
775:
576:, all in 2015. Then in 2018, there is extremely detailed coverage by
819:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
166:
162:
158:
410:
I found more RS and removed some PROMO, so please per
222:
287:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
831:). No further edits should be made to this page.
386:Note: This discussion has been included in the
305:Note: This discussion has been included in the
285:Note: This discussion has been included in the
84:Articles for deletion/Cathy Tie (2nd nomination)
480:https://www.forbes.com/30-under-30-nominations/
379:outside this topic and newly created account.
236:
8:
388:list of Science-related deletion discussions
124:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
607:Btw the nominator is a Paid AfD nominator?
385:
307:list of Women-related deletion discussions
304:
284:
76:
478:) In regards to the selection process
7:
24:
109:Introduction to deletion process
79:Articles for deletion/Cathy Tie
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
344:08:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
319:02:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
299:02:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
278:02:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
257:02:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
808:18:55, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
787:21:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
770:19:49, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
747:10:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
729:08:06, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
708:04:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
64:22:23, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
679:04:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
657:00:06, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
632:18:21, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
618:09:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
590:02:04, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
572:, a photo and paragraph in
548:02:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
521:01:39, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
506:01:36, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
444:19:41, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
424:19:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
400:15:09, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
364:15:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
99:(AfD)? Read these primers!
848:
821:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
75:AfDs for this article:
457:few or no other edits
377:few or no other edits
97:Articles for deletion
459:outside this topic.
492:comment added by
460:
402:
380:
321:
301:
114:Guide to deletion
104:How to contribute
839:
800:StupidLookingKid
508:
449:StupidLookingKid
446:
436:StupidLookingKid
369:StupidLookingKid
366:
356:StupidLookingKid
332:Thiel Fellowship
241:
240:
226:
174:
156:
94:
34:
847:
846:
842:
841:
840:
838:
837:
836:
835:
829:deletion review
761:
487:
183:
147:
131:
128:
91:
88:
73:
55:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
845:
843:
834:
833:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
810:
793:
792:
791:
790:
789:
759:
732:
731:
711:
710:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
682:
681:
662:
661:
660:
659:
637:
636:
635:
634:
566:Globe and Mail
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
551:
550:
526:
525:
524:
523:
464:
463:
462:
461:
428:
427:
404:
403:
382:
381:
348:
347:
323:
322:
302:
281:
280:
244:
243:
180:
127:
126:
121:
111:
106:
89:
87:
86:
81:
74:
72:
67:
53:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
844:
832:
830:
826:
822:
817:
816:
809:
805:
801:
797:
794:
788:
785:
782:
781:
776:
773:
772:
771:
768:
767:
766:
757:
753:
750:
749:
748:
744:
740:
736:
735:
734:
733:
730:
726:
722:
718:
715:
714:
713:
712:
709:
705:
701:
700:Expertwikiguy
697:
693:
690:
689:
680:
676:
672:
668:
667:
666:
665:
664:
663:
658:
654:
650:
646:
643:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
633:
629:
625:
621:
620:
619:
615:
611:
608:
604:
600:
596:
593:
592:
591:
587:
583:
582:HouseOfChange
579:
575:
571:
567:
563:
549:
545:
541:
536:
535:
533:
530:
529:
528:
527:
522:
518:
514:
510:
509:
507:
503:
499:
495:
491:
484:
481:
477:
473:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
458:
454:
450:
445:
441:
437:
432:
431:
430:
429:
425:
421:
417:
416:HouseOfChange
413:
409:
406:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
384:
383:
378:
374:
370:
365:
361:
357:
353:
350:
349:
345:
341:
337:
333:
328:
325:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
303:
300:
296:
292:
288:
283:
282:
279:
275:
271:
270:HouseOfChange
268:
264:
261:
260:
259:
258:
254:
250:
239:
235:
232:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:
211:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
189:
186:
185:Find sources:
181:
178:
172:
168:
164:
160:
155:
151:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
129:
125:
122:
119:
115:
112:
110:
107:
105:
102:
101:
100:
98:
93:
85:
82:
80:
77:
71:
68:
66:
65:
62:
61:
60:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
820:
818:
795:
778:
764:
763:
755:
716:
691:
606:
594:
577:
574:Fast Company
573:
570:Toronto Star
569:
565:
531:
488:— Preceding
482:
471:
407:
351:
326:
262:
245:
233:
227:
219:
212:
206:
200:
194:
184:
90:
58:
57:
49:
47:
31:
28:
721:CosmicNotes
649:CosmicNotes
494:CosmicNotes
455:) has made
392:Kj cheetham
375:) has made
336:CosmicNotes
210:free images
752:VocalIndia
739:VocalIndia
671:VocalIndia
645:VocalIndia
610:VocalIndia
825:talk page
756:shouldn't
622:... no.
133:Cathy Tie
70:Cathy Tie
37:talk page
827:or in a
780:Thjarkur
765:Rosguill
760:signed,
717:Question
605:is met.
603:WP:BASIC
562:WP:BASIC
502:contribs
490:unsigned
177:View log
118:glossary
59:Rosguill
54:signed,
39:or in a
624:FalconK
540:FalconK
532:Comment
513:FalconK
472:Comment
311:FalconK
291:FalconK
249:FalconK
216:WP refs
204:scholar
150:protect
145:history
95:New to
784:(talk)
696:wp:GNG
694:Meets
599:WP:HEY
412:WP:HEY
408:Update
352:Delete
188:Google
154:delete
231:JSTOR
192:books
171:views
163:watch
159:links
16:<
804:talk
796:Keep
743:talk
725:talk
704:talk
692:Keep
675:talk
653:talk
628:talk
614:talk
597:per
595:Keep
586:talk
568:and
560:Per
544:talk
517:talk
498:talk
453:talk
440:talk
420:talk
396:talk
373:talk
360:talk
340:talk
327:Keep
315:talk
295:talk
274:talk
263:Keep
253:talk
224:FENS
198:news
167:logs
141:talk
137:edit
50:keep
578:CNN
238:TWL
175:– (
806:)
745:)
727:)
706:)
677:)
655:)
630:)
616:)
588:)
546:)
519:)
504:)
500:•
447:—
442:)
426:]]
422:)
398:)
390:.
367:—
362:)
342:)
317:)
309:.
297:)
289:.
276:)
255:)
218:)
169:|
165:|
161:|
157:|
152:|
148:|
143:|
139:|
52:.
802:(
741:(
723:(
702:(
698:.
673:(
651:(
626:(
612:(
584:(
542:(
515:(
496:(
451:(
438:(
418:(
394:(
371:(
358:(
346:]
338:(
313:(
293:(
272:(
251:(
242:)
234:·
228:·
220:·
213:·
207:·
201:·
195:·
190:(
182:(
179:)
173:)
135:(
120:)
116:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.