Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate Middleton 1

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. – ABCD 21:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Kate Middleton

edit

Girlfriends of princes are not encyclopedic, delete--nixie 12:49, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

  • Redirect to Prince William. Zscout370 13:33, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Prince William José San Martin 13:38, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. "Like the prince, with whom she shares an apartment..." Not long ago, this would have been unthinkable. She could be considered the common-law wife to the almost assured future King of Britain and the Commonwealth Realms. Precedent has established that a baby who died shortly after birth but happened to be heir to a throne is encyclopedic and should be kept; this is a grown woman about whom more can be said. Even if her relationship with Prince William of Wales doesn't last, she is sure to be noted in the future and of interest to royal historians. Finally, Camilla Parker Bowles was until just recently only notable as the girlfriend of a prince - and was created all the way back in 2002, and productively edited hundreds of times since. Samaritan 15:15, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I agree with Samaritan's assessment of the article. Mgm|(talk) 17:31, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. ElBenevolente 18:15, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Zscout370 18:19, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as per Samaritan. Paradiso 21:16, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • weak keep even though I think she's only worth a para. or so in willie's article, that argument will just lead to the "wiki is not paper" response.
  • Keep, notable with the potential to be more so. Megan1967 07:04, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. "Significant others" of royalty, especially a royal family with as much media exposure at Britain's, are inherently notable.23skidoo 13:32, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Their relationship may or may not last, but to be co-habiting with the future monarch is in itself notable. Many people meet their future spouses at university, and if this is the case, she could be a future Queen! If the situation changes in the future (i.e. the relationship ends), we could re-assess this, but for the moment, she certainly deserves an entry in Wikipedia. Cal T 14:17, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. If/when they split up, this page should be considered for deletion (and notes appended to the Prince's page), but the significant other of the future monarch is herself encyclopedic. Eliot
  • Keep Plenty of people who have never met her and don't expect to might want to look her up. Therefore she is notable. Oliver Chettle 23:28, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Kate_Middleton_1&oldid=49910404"