Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Bird

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Bird (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)

Unfortunately this article falls foul of WP:NOTMEMORIAL and the subject is not notable. Mccapra (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 16:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 16:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 16:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This article is not a memorial, it is an entry for someone who did carry out significant work (the overhaul of the Metropolitan Police's Black Museum) with relevence to a perennially interesting topic, the Jack the Ripper murders, and other Met Police history. The WP:PEOPLE policy requires that someone is remarkable, and Maggie's work was remarkable enough to be featured in newspaper articles on television and referred to in various publications and she receives many credits on this website https://www.casebook.org/index.html. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saint Michael 2010 (talk • contribs) 17:06, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agreed that it reads like a memorial and subject is not notable. Perhaps information on her work overhauling the Met Archives could be moved onto the Metropolitan Police page, if there is enough sourcing to warrant that.Kalethan (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I agree with Kalethan that she may rate a mention in a larger article, but I can't see that she's independently notable; a cleanup of the language wouldn't solve that problem. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 04:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not notable fails GNG. Iamreallygoodatcheckers (talk) 11:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Do Not Delete. The suggestion that Maggie Bird was not notable arises from ignorance of her work. Before she took on her position at the Met Police museum, books about Jack the Ripper and the Met Police as a whole would regularly suggest that there were secret files that we hidden away and contained information that could be useful to researchers. Part of Maggie's notability stems from her opening up the archives to researchers and bringing them into public view. Keith Skinner writing in 'The Complete Jack The Ripper A To Z' (John Blake Publishing, 2010) says 'Along with almost everybody who has in recent years written anything about the history of the Metropolitan Police, we are extremely grateful for the indefatigable help and support given by Maggie Bird, curator of the Metropolitan Police Historical Collection'. User: Saint Michael 2010
• Comment. She seems to have been influential as the curator of the Met Police Museum, and I can find a number of references thanking her for research assistance. However I'm having trouble finding any significant coverage of Bird herself, as required by WP:ANYBIO. pburka (talk) 19:20, 30 May 2020 (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.