Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celia, Viscountess Whitelaw of Penrith

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. ^{Let's talk}_{about my edits?} 15:07, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Celia, Viscountess Whitelaw of Penrith[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A loyal spouse and charity worker, but fails to meet notability guidelines, fails WP:BIO. WWGB (talk) 03:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. —WWGB (talk) 03:25, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. WWGB (talk) 03:25, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disagree: Lady Walker was a Viscountess (albeit through her husband) and also an ATS volunteer, philanthropist, charity worker and horticulturist. Quis separabit? 13:54, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable. -WikiSkeptic (talk) 03:43, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Obituaries are a good way of assessing a person's notability because this indicates whether third-party sources consider a person important enough to write about long after they have faded from public attention. Search for Viscountess Whitelaw turns up obituaries in a number of local papers, but the biggie is the Scotsman, which has a large coverage. Bear in mind that whilst she was active, the vast majority of coverage would have been in pre-internet sources, so unless you had ready access to news archives beyond what Google News offers, you can't know if she's non-notable. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 09:18, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (as article's creator). Quis separabit? 12:57, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE: if article is deleted, should be returned to redirect, as which it was originally created, and which should not be objectionable to any party, especially as the redirect was categorized. Quis separabit? 13:01, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While someone who holds a title through marriage is not inherently notable, the fact she was given a substantial obituary in a major national newspaper suggests notability in her own right. -- Necrothesp (talk) 17:11, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. —Mais oui! (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2012 (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.