Deletion of Charlotte Hughes (supercentenarian)

Comment: This nomination seemed to be based on a justifiable exasperation with the GRG's habit of spewing cruft, rather than on a proper examination of the topic. Neither the nominator nor any of the other editors commenting give any indication of having done any  research at all. {{smiley|sad
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE)

Comment: to an appropriate list. I never worry about notability in these cases, but rather focus on  -- what's worth saying about the person and where to say it. Here's what the article tells us about ''her
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:PAGEDECIDE)

Comment: per io. Living to be the oldest person of any nation is "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." I would oppose any merge per agelength and a lack of protection against a minibio being nuked in future against consensus at AfD
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Bots (WP:B||WP:P)

Comment: This article fails , ,  and . There is no policy that the "oldest x" is notable and this article is packed with longevity fancruft like what year of Queen Victoria's reign she was born in, how many monarchs and prime ministers she lived under, had tea with a famous person, and got to stay in a nice hotel on someone else's dime. Her name, life dates, and nationality are best handled on the four lists they already reside on. This  is not needed
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BIO1E||WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:NOPAGE||WP:PERMASTUB)