Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claire Booth

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 redirect to Alexander Windsor, Earl of Ulster. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:08, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Claire Booth

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

User:Surtsicna rationale: She is not notable as a physician. She does no royal work, so she is not notable as such either. She is just not notable at all. The sources cited here confirm that. Boldly redirecting to the article about her husband Pelmeen10 (talk) 11:22, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This has been a redirect for two years. Why was the article restored only to be nominated for deletion immediately? Surtsicna (talk) 11:27, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Because no discussion was held 2 years ago. With this amount of interwikis, there's a possibility the person is notable. I'm no expert in this subject though. Pelmeen10 (talk) 13:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There was also no opposition to turning the article into a redirect two years ago. You recreated an article after two years just because its turning into a redirect was a bold move? And you do not even have an opinion about the matter? I do not think that's reasonable or helpful. Either way, there are 8 links altogether in the main space, 5 of which are from the articles about the subject's family (father-in-law, 18th-century ancestors, and an nth cousin), 2 of which are disambiguation, and 1 of which refers to another person.
This woman is a private individual, which is why she is not covered by any reputable media. Her privacy should be respected by Wikipedia as well. The only reason the article ever existed is because her husband happens to be first cousin once removed of Elizabeth II. Surtsicna (talk) 14:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:40, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or restore redirect. You can't inherit notability. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:45, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She lacks the coverage to justify an article. Bringing this here is just a sign of Wikipediabeuracracy standing in the way of making the project useful.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect: no evidence of notability herself, but redirect to notable spouse is fine. Keep the category Category:British courtesy countesses, as this is her near-notability characteristic. PamD 10:19, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Improve the redirect to point to section Alexander Windsor, Earl of Ulster#Marriage, and add the {{for|the Olympic skier|Clare Booth}} hatnote at that section, as seen currently at the top of her article. PamD 10:29, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. maybe redirect as member of British Royal Family. There is a Claire Booth with good cites in biomed on GS [1], but I am not sure it is the same. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:41, 14 July 2019 (UTC).[reply]
- Can you please try to demonstrate that the subject of this article is notable? This Claire Booth is a pediatrician, not a biomedicine researcher. Surtsicna (talk) 23:14, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Restore redirect, adding a little more to husband's article. Johnbod (talk) 16:11, 15 July 2019 (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.