Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonia Gerena Rivera (2nd nomination)
WP:NOPAGE. . There is nothing, and I do mean nothing, of encyclopedic value in the article.  It's nearly all "horse-race" reporting about a mythical aging contest. Human longevity is a fit (and important) topic for an encyclopedia to cover. But the mundane details of the everyday life of every long-lived person is not - and bloviation about their place jockeying for position in some fanciful race to hold a "title" or break a "record" is nonsensical and a little bit morbid.  Are users of this encyclopedia expected to be looking for information about which old person on which continent staved off the visit of the Angel of Death by 12 days or 7 months longer than which other old person?  There's a serious misapprehension evident in the !votes above about the meaning of the term "notability" on Wikipedia.  It's not as loose as the conversational meaning of the word.  Reasonable people can differ about whether a particular senior citizen is notable in this sense.  But "" is a term of art on Wikipedia, with a very specific definition. The General Notability Guidelines require non-trivial, significant coverage in multiple |reliable sources that are independent of one another and of the subject.  We don't have that here. We have a slideshow with a picture of the subject and an assertion of her age from a presentation by a longevity expert: ? We have a couple of links to Gerontology Research Group web pages: ? ? And we have a birthday article and an obit, with mundane details of the subject's life and some "horse race" data.? Any way you slice, dice, mince or mangle these "sources" you do not wind up with a bio appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia, at least not if you're following Wikipedia's rules
— User:David, 18:35, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:RS||WP:OR||WP:GNG||WP:notable (Wikipedia:Notability)