Deletion of Daniela Georgieva

Comment: or at the very least '''merge''' to a sports list. Sure, she marginally checks some of the boxes at , and sure, if you look hard enough you may find some reliable sources, but it is extremely shocking to me that an AFD for a |BLP would get such a high number of outright keeps when the subject of the article has issued a personal appeal for the page to be deleted because it is causes her and her family to suffer. Has the Wikipedian community lost its sence of |common sense and become a box-checking machine? Do the benefits of keeping this article really outweigh the harm we are doing to one person and her family? I expected some discussion, but to see so many "keeps" is both extremely surprising and very sad. Perhaps I've spent too much time away from Wikipedia to notice this change. Let throw out some quotations from our own policy pages and essays
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTRACK||WP:BLP||WP:COMMON)

Comment: Daniela Georgieva meets , but the reason why I voted "weak keep" is that articles of this kind are not biographies in the strict sense of the term. They are likely to be too short and are basically summaries of a person's sports career
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NTRACK)

Comment: Olympians qualify for , and there's no good reason to censor a publicly available and reliably sourced birth date
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: Its a very strange thing to want to deny date of birth when the http://www.iaaf.org/athletes/biographies/letter=0/athcode=75060/index.html IAAF and many other sports websites list it anyway. Would the IAAF censor her birthdate too? She appears to meet . We cannot bow down on a whim to people who want to deny people the right to knowledge. Anything "badly informed" can be fixed. We should ''not'' delete articles like this. It comes down to pure embarrassment in front of her pupils that she was banned for doping and obviously wants to get on with her life and put it behind her which is fair enough but I think it would be wrong for wikipedia to hide it. If Marion Jones contacted wikipedia asking the same thing should we delete her article too? How about Jennifer Capriati? Should the German and French wiki articles also be deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ATHLETE)

Comment: Not hugely notable per . There are also signs of  as the biographical detail is rather thin. As for the date/place of birth issue, there is a source https://web.archive.org/web/20200418031631/https://www.sports-reference.com/olympics/athletes/ge/daniela-georgieva-1.html here which seems OK. Possibly there is a dislike of the failed drug test in 1996 being mentioned, but if anything is outright wrong in the article,  it should be mentioned clearly as a reason for deletion. Attempts were made to blank the page in January 2012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/173.77.167.7, leading to suggestions of a |conflict of interest
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:ADAM||WP:COI)

Comment: The subject of the article easily passes  as she ''"has competed in the Olympics or senior IAAF World Championships''"; the page should be kept despite her request for deletion as there are no notability concerns. Our guidelines allow for the exact date of birth to be removed if the subject requests it, whether or not it's easily available elsewhere is irrelevant; we should leave out the full date and protect the page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSPORTS)

Comment: The date of birth and place is already publicly available information and the article appears to pass . None of the independent sources appear to be in English so it's hard to see their reliability, but if the referencing is accurate, I don't see how the article is badly informed
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSPORTS)

Comment: definitely falls within our definition of notability for athletes. Remove birthdate, however silly that may seem to some of us, since it's within our parameters; reject her desire to cover up embarassing parts of her earlier career, per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (:WP:NOTCENSORED)