Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Willing Byrd (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. (non-admin closure) — Music1201 ^talk 17:07, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Willing Byrd[edit]

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

Fails WP:GNG. Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. The article makes no mention of her doing anything notable. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:28, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:29, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It seems to me from reading about husband and wife that the wife had the greater achievements. Consider merging William Byrd III here after this AFD has closed? Thincat (talk) 21:54, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Thincat (talk) 11:23, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I believe the nominator has made a fundamental, though common, error. Wikipedia's notability guidelines are based almost entirely on coverage in reliable sources, not in accomplishments. The statement "The article makes no mention of her doing anything notable" is meaningless. — MShabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 13:04, 10 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She passes GNG. Several books have coverage about her: Virginia Women, Flight from Monticello, Mr. Jefferson's Women, and the latter book talks about Byrd in relation to education reform. Also coverage here and a letter. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 21:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:58, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:21, 16 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think Megalibrarygirl nails the argument. The article clearly has sufficient sources to meet WP:GNG. The fact that she was included in "Virginia Women in History" by the Library of Virginia (with the accompanying biography page[1]) is a clincher.--Mojo Hand (talk) 13:50, 21 July 2016 (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.