Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fanny Alger

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. Eluchil404 (talk) 07:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fanny Alger[edit]

With all due respect, I would submit that Fanny Alger is only notable for having been the alleged first polygamous wife of Joseph Smith, Jr.. Although she has been mentioned in secondary source material, it is exclusively re: the above noted alleged relationship with a famous person. I am concerned with the deletion reasoning that relationships do not confer notability. Alger was not notable for anything else, even including within the religious realm: she received no notable awards or honor, did not make a widely recognized contribution in any field, did not write anything that was published, or receive notoriety (or infamy, since the allegations were mostly made via contemporary rumors) for anything other than the allegation that she was the (secret) polygamous first wife of a famous religious figure, whom she did not live or have children with. There is also no consensus among historians that Alger was ever a polygamous wife of Smith, but that there is evidence she may have had a sexual affair with him (not a clandestine marriage) - this diminishes the need for an article even more. Alger herself never made any claims that she was married to Smith and refused to speak about the subject. Alger should not have her own article when she can be mentioned in others, such as the article on Smith, Origin of Latter Day Saint polygamy or List of the wives of Joseph Smith, Jr.. Wikipedia:Notability (people) states that if "person A has a relationship with well-known person B (it) is not a reason for a standalone article on A", yet "person A may be included in the related article on B", which is already the case with Alger. Lastly, I would note that the bulk of the article relies on three unreliable sources: a website with a newspaper clipping and two parts of a non-credible website - one now states merely LDS Archives, with no further info. Thank you. A Sniper (talk) 15:56, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Notability is not contagious, and unless there is any evidence that she is notable for any reason other than (allegedly) being Smith's wife, that doesn't meet WP:N. RGTraynor 16:15, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Fanny Alger is a well known figure in Mormon history, and is notable in that she is argued to have been the first polygamous wife of Joseph Smith. This claim is disputed, but even so, all Mormon historians know very well who this person is, and why she is important. If she was the first polygamous wife of Smith, then that marriage has a great deal of special relevance to the entire Latter Day Saint movement since it would have been the beginning of Polygamy and the Latter Day Saint movement - which ended up being quite a notorious affair. Other responses to A Sniper:
- I don't think WP:NOTINHERITED applies here. I can't help thinking about Monica Lewinsky, who is only notable because of her relationship with Bill Clinton, and that was only an affair, not an alleged polygamous marriage - surely by these standards Fanny would be notable.
- As far as sources are concerned - I put in the "LDS archives" because that is where the original letter that is cited is kept. It is absolutely a credible source. Alger is mentioned in dozens of historical books on the topic of LDS polygamy as she is a controversial figure during those early years.--Descartes1979 (talk) 20:20, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comparing Lewinsky, a highly public figure who has had biographies written about her, never mind mere tens of thousands of articles, with a woman about which almost nothing is known save for geneaological info, is a straw-man argument bordering on the baroque. Reading over WP:BIO, I see no criteria explicitly stating that being in a polygamous marriage makes someone prima facie notable. RGTraynor 18:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the user above points out the word if, which is very important...it isn't even known to any certainty that this woman was even a wife. And comparisons to Lewinsky? Lewinsky went public, she & Clinton admitted the affair, it received much media attention when it was timely - and Alger? She and Smith never admitted anything, information today is based on reporting of contemporary rumors, letters decades after the fact (or from disgruntled church rivals of Smith), and what one historian called speculation. But the bottom line is that Alger isn't notable for anything else - nothing - only that she may have been a polygamous wife. And as for the LDS Archives, there should at the least be credible, secondary source references to these letters, if they are indeed the smoking gun. A Sniper (talk) 22:51, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are dozens of reliable secondary references that cite this letter in the LDS church archives - including Todd Compton, George Smith (Dialogue article), Fawn Brodie - and that is just off the top of my head - as I said before, Fanny Alger is a well known figure in Mormon history - you don't have to look very far to find her.--Descartes1979 (talk) 18:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...and she's famous for what exactly...perhaps having been a polygamous wife of Joseph Smith? Even the historians aren't in agreement on this - even if they mention her in their writings - and she herself never stated that she was ever married to Smith. It is all hearsay, rumor, gossip - nothing to base an article on. Alger isn't notable for anything else - she never accomplished or did anything of note, including within the church. A Sniper (talk) 19:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nominators shouldn't also !vote rather than commenting, especially further down in the discussion, as this can lead to confusion.John Z (talk) 17:26, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:32, 9 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While the nominator is correct that notability is not inherited, he appears to misunderstand what that means. It means that we cannot use mere mentions in sources that are about somebody or something else. We instead need substantive coverage of the actual subject of the article. I believe that test is met for Fanny. Yes, the coverage is largely about the relationship with Smith, as that is the source of her notability. Similarly, the sources about Alan Shepard are largely about his being an astronaut, as that is the source of his notability - but nobody would seriously argue to delete his article because his notability is inherited from the U.S. space program. The nominator also ignored the article's references section, which does contain reasonable references. The only real doubt about Fanny is whether she was one of Smith's wives or just someone with whom Smith had an affair. Either way, it is clear that the incident and rumors surrounding her had an effects on Smith, Emma, other Mormon leaders, and the future development of the movement. Simple google book or google scholar searching reveals plenty of material to support the current article. GRBerry 18:58, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Shepard accomplished something - Fanny Alger did not. The few references (that aren't noted as being dubious) elevate rumor, gossip, and innuendo, with no admission from the alleged participants. There has not been a single biographical work written about this person, merely references to something that may or may not have occurred. In every instance the writing is ABOUT SMITH, not about Alger, and Alger is mentioned in passing due to the alleged relationship. Whether or not any of this speculation had an effect on Smith or anyone else isn't remotely proven. In any case, there is so little to write about Alger that it could easily be found within the several articles that already exist on the wider subject of Smith alleged polygamous wives. Best, A Sniper (talk) 19:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:58, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--although the notion of a merge to List of wives of Joseph Smith, Jr. raises some intriguing possibilities, too. Jclemens (talk) 03:12, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per GRBerry. I too think that the nominator is misinterpreting the "notability not inherited principle". The latter means that a subject is not notable simply by virtue of being closely associated to another notable subject. However, if the subject receives significant coverage (for whatever reason), the subject is notable. Fanny Alger is notable not simply because she was a wife of Joseph smith but because she received sibstantial coverage by independent reliable sources. It is completely unnecessary for the person to accomplish anything of note or to be remarkable in any way watsoever to be notable. The only thing that counts is if there is sufficient coverage or not. Compare, as an extreme example, to the case of Klara Hitler, Adolf Hitler's mother. She also seems to have been a rather unremarkable person, who, nevertheless, absolutely merits a WP article because of the substantial coverage she received. Granted, this coverage was motivated exclusively by the fact that she was Hitler's mother, but the motivation of sources providing the coverage is immaterial in determining notability. In the case of Fanny Alger the sources listed in the article already put this case over the WP:BIO bar. Nsk92 (talk) 05:31, 13 September 2008 (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.