Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The abolitionist Weld–Grimké wedding

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 Pennsylvania Hall (Philadelphia)#Monday, May 14, 1838. As noted in my relisting comment: consensus is that we should not have an article about the wedding in addition to the articles about the spouses. Because several people suggest a selective merger, which is not possible after a deletion, redirecting the title to where the event is already covered is a sensible compromise, to allow merging from the history. Sandstein 10:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The abolitionist Weld–Grimké wedding[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)

This event does not appear to be covered in-depth in any reliable sources. Of the four references currently in the article, only one is primarily about the article topic, and it is a WordPress blog post. I don't see anything more than passing mentions on Google Scholar ([1], [2]), and the best I can find elsewhere is this 2-minute video from a local PBS affiliate. Wikipedia does not seem to have many articles on weddings, and most of those that do exist are about royal weddings. Some of this content could be merged into Theodore Weld and Angelina Grimké, but I do not think the available sourcing justifies a standalone article. Rublov (talk) 17:38, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:46, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Theodore Dwight Weld, Angelina Grimké, and Pennsylvania Hall (Philadelphia), accordingly. Any important information can be easily placed into one of those three. The notability of this particular event is intrinsically tied to 1) the couple itself and 2) the building where it took place, so it's more beneficial within those articles than separate. Kncny11 ^(shoot) 18:29, 15 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am rewriting the article and adding additional documentation. deisenbe (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Deisenbe:, you are welcome to continue working on the article while this AfD is in progress. The problem isn't that the article is low quality, though. I found it a well-written and interesting read. The problem is that the article lacks references that demonstrate that the event was notable independent of the notability of the participants, which is why I am proposing taking the content that you have written, which is valuable, and merging it (perhaps trimmed slightly) into the articles on Theodore Weld and Angelina Grimké, where it will probably get more exposure anyway. Rublov (talk) 11:39, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rublov: I hope you will find that I have addressed this issue. ¶ There is plenty of documentation on the Weld–Grimké relationship and its importance in the birth of women's rights; their love letters have been published. I'm expanding this. While I think you're right that it would get more readers if inserted into the Grimké/Weld articles, I don't think the topic would or could be given its importance there. There is a parallel in a related article, the one on the Grimké sisters, which I personally had nothing to do with. Everything, at least theoretically, could go into the articles on the two sisters (Angelina, Sarah). But the two, as a team, get their own article. And if you can have an article on a team of two sisters, why not about a husband and wife team? But it seems strange, to me at least, to write an article on their relationship, their romance, their partnership. "Wedding" is the traditional place to discuss the bride and groom together, and it was a most unusual wedding, with joint white and black ministers, denounced by the Quakers, of all people. It was capped by the worst case of arson in American history as of that date (except for the British burning the Capitol and the White House during the War of 1812). The grand new venue, in which Angelina was the last speaker, while the windows were being broken, whose inauguration all of these out of town visitors were there to attend, was burned to the ground, and rioters prevented firemen from saving the building. That article I did write, and I'm proud of it. If it hadn't been for that riot and arson there probably would have been more on the wedding itself.

Anyway, I've put Under Construction on it. As you probably know, that is deleted automatically after inactivity, and I'm asking you to postpone any decision and action until I'm done, at which point I will take the Under Construction down. It won't be long. deisenbe (talk) 13:33, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deisenbe, the normal period for an AfD is seven days, but it may run longer than that depending on participation and whether consensus is clear. But you don't need to improve the article in order to save it from deletion. All you need to do is present a convincing argument that it meets WP:GNG. Rublov (talk) 14:08, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of expanding it to be "The Grimké–Weld marriage"? deisenbe (talk) 14:25, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would echo Kncny11's reasoning that the topic, whether narrowly or broadly construed, is intrinsically tied to Weld and Grimké. Page view data shows that Theodore Dwight Weld and Angelina Grimké together received nearly 30x as many views as The abolitionist Weld–Grimké wedding in April 2021. If this article were merged into those pages, the information would be much more visible and useful to our readers. Rublov (talk) 14:57, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no logical redirect target and any pertinent information can be merged into either of the bride/groom's articles. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 00:28, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Editorofthewiki, Kncny11, and Rublov: As I am actively working on revising the article, which has more than doubled in length since it was nominated for deletion four days ago, and addressing or trying to address the concerns raised, I am requesting that no other opinions be posted here until I'm done, which will be in a matter of days. I am also requesting that those who already posted reread it after I'm finished. You will know I'm finished when I remove the Under Construction template. deisenbe (talk) 09:55, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As of today it is 4 times longer. I don't mean to imply that it is therefore better or that the objections have been adequately addressed, just that I'm working on it. deisenbe (talk) 11:16, 21 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Still not convinced that this was a notable event, or that it qualifies for an article. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 12:13, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: So far, tentative consensus is that we should not have an article about the wedding in addition to the articles about the spouses. Because several people suggest a selective merger, which is not possible after a deletion, redirecting the title to where the event is already covered (Pennsylvania_Hall (Philadelphia)#Monday, May 14, 1838) might be considered, to allow merging from the history. But more views might be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:34, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:58, 30 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.