Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amelia Hillary

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 04:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Amelia Hillary

While she may have notable family members, there is no evidence of her notability in the article. Mattinbgn/^talk 01:32, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article is pretty well written, but the notability of this person is not enough to warrant an article. Honestly, merely being related to someone who is notable is not enough by itself. Anynobody 03:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not a bad article, just the topic is not notable in her own right Hornandsoccer ^Talk 03:36, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable and "Hilary is a (sic) fiercely private..." anyway. Clarityfiend 05:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete NN. I kept trying to find 'achievements' of note - there's more made of her parents divorce. Shenme 05:48, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete along with BLP problems--the article reports her as trying to avoid personal publicity. A mention in the article on her grandfather would be appropriate. DGG 05:56, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; being a relative of someone that is notable does not necessarily make you notable. Sr13 (T|C) 09:50, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I expect that in the future she will be notable enough based on her own accomplishments to merit an article, but she is not now. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 16:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Thewinchester ^(talk) 05:07, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Hornandsoccer Bandwagonman 10:36, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, it's a shame to nominate an otherwise good article, but she's just not notable enough. Lankiveil 13:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.