Deletion of Martha Graham (supercentenarian)

Comment: The Guinness Book of World Records would help verify the claim and justify her inclusion in the 3 lists where she is already included, but the notability test for a standalone article article requires substantial coverage in |reliable sources
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: I don't believe that GRG is reliable, though others may differ; but both Guinness World Records and GRG offer only trivial coverage. Once again, Kitia, please do ''read'' what  says about non-trivial coverage
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: No substantial independent, reliable sources to establish meeting  or . Especially troublesome is that much of this seems to be |original research without citations to back it up. Nothing here that couldn't be summarized in the many supercentenarian lists. Cheers
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:BIO||WP:OR)

Comment: into 'List of...' She deserves a sentence or two, but until there is enough for a ''Whole Article'' (as in  compliant), a mention in a List will do
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: I do believes this satisfies the spirit, if not the letter of , if it pertains to someone who was a one point the longest person ever to have lived (apologies to Methuselah). I do believe that ''The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field'' may apply as well
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: Having been the oldest living person ever for a time obviously constitutes notability.   has a common sense clause and it should be invoked here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)