Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justine Musk (2nd nomination)

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. The article's subject is found to be notable. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Justine Musk

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Justine Musk
• Articles for deletion/Justine Musk (2nd nomination)

Justine Musk (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

The IP left the following reason at the talk page: I have googled this person and have found no additional relevant articles that make her meet the notability guidelines for Wikipedia. She is an published author, and so are probably another 1,000,000 plus people on this planet. She married a billionaire, this does not make her notable. I can't see why she has a wikiepedia entry as in my humble opinion she is not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.69.24.118 (talk) 12:01, 15 March 2015 (UTC) Nomination added by --Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC) (note that I have no opinion on the notability). Ymblanter (talk) 11:53, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

• Keep - The topic is notable because she has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, the core definition of WP:GNG. It's not a matter of why someone is notable, but if someone is notable. The nom's subjective opinion ("She married a billionaire") has nothing to do with our notability guidelines. Just the Marie Claire, The Daily Dot and Toronto Star articles, that are already linked in the article, demonstrate notability. If the nom wants to cite WP:IGNORE as their deletion rationale, they're free to. A person can become notable for reasons that don't seem right, but that doesn't mean they're not notable. --Oakshade (talk) 01:35, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
• Keep - Agreed with Oakshade, not much else I can add to that. She seems to have quite a bit of notability, and whether that's independent of her ex-husband or not is irrelevant. 128.84.127.74 (talk) 06:18, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
• Keep - Agreed with Oakshade. Also, I read an article on Quora written by "Justine Musk", and went to consult wikipedia to see what, if any, her connection to Elon Musk was. I was so happy to see the page, and sad to see it being considered for deletion. It seems to me that as long as she continues to publicly speak and write, she'll be notable enough to keep. Besides, how can I tell if she's becoming more notable, without a wikipedia page to track the articles she's writing? Jorgbrown (talk) 08:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
• Keep - Agree with Oakshade's persuasive arguments. A google search quickly identifies many articles written by or about Justine Musk, which seems to be evidence of notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.211.9.30 (talk) 17:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:50, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

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.