Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Koto Okubo (2nd nomination)
I do feel that Koto Okubo's status as a WOW qualified her for "widespread non-trivial coverage". As has been stated in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_World%27s_Oldest_People#Notability_and_sourcing, "significant, independent coverage in reliable sources is required"; Koto Okubo qualifies for this, as her status as the World's Oldest Woman garnered her attention and she was covered in worldwide media press ranging from The Huffington Post, see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/13/koto-okubo-dead-dies-oldest-woman_n_2466701.html, to CBS News and from The Telegraph to Japan Daily Press. To justify the retention of Mrs. Okubo's article, it is not only worth mentioning that Wikipedia is not a hardcopy encyclopedia - thus not limited to space - but also that notability is not determined by the length of an article. Mrs. Okubo's article could still be expanded on by adding material from other sources that might be located in the future. To draw the discussion even wider... Wikipedia has articles on every player who once participated in any major league sports, even if they played just one game -  and this is in the Wikipedia guidelines! Moreover, there are entire Wikipedia articles on draws of virtually all Grand Slams there have ever been in the Open Era of tennis, and statistics on various tennis players - the latter clearly violating the Wikipedia policy of . Surely, if these articles are justified, an additional policy of people having attained WOP/WOM/WOW status can be proposed. Now don't get me wrong; I see the need to trim down on trivial articles on supercentenarians as I realise that Wikipedia is a(n) (scientific) encyclopedia instead of a "fanclub" - I understand that not everyone should have an article about him/her, I am not delusional - yet I do think that a status as WOP/WOM/WOW (a title which will always be in the history books) justifies having an article about that person, even if it is not the longest of articles. Lastly, there is not a single WOP/WOM/WOW titleholder from the last thirty years without an own article; then why should Mrs. Okubo be the lone exception to that? It seems to me that some of the voters here are doing it out of oint
— User:Fiskje88, 18:50, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:NOR||WP:P (Wikipedia:No original research)