Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Mary Whitley

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 merge to George Cambridge, 2nd Marquess of Cambridge. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:19, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Mary Whitley[edit]

[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)

The article has been tagged as unsourced for 5 years. A cursory search on Google Books reveals no indication of the subject's notability. Apparently the only reason we have the article is that she was distantly related to the British queen; but that is not a valid reason, nor is Wikipedia a genealogy website. Surtsicna (talk) 09:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 09:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 09:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 09:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 09:24, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~, essentially per nom. The only coverage that I can find consists only of trivial coverage (e.g. a passing mention in a list) or routine stories (e.g. pregnancy announcements), none of which is enough to meet WP:BASIC. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 05:45, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't object to a merge as proposed by Furius. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 16:17, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into George Cambridge, 2nd Marquess of Cambridge (essentially just noting her dates, who she married, that she didn't exercise any royal duties, and her offspring). Furius (talk) 17:25, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:17, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as suggested. There's not enough sourcing. Bearian (talk) 15:31, 29 June 2021 (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.