Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lady Frideswide Lovell

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 Henry Norris (courtier). I'm closing as merge rather than delete as this would make a reasonable redirect. Editors are welcome to change the target of the redirect if they find a better one. Also, on a tangential note, we need to find out whether she was Henry Norris's mother (as claimed in this article), or his wife (as claimed in the Norris article). — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 06:02, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Frideswide Lovell

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

Only claim to notability appears to be relationship with other well-known persons, as discussed at WP:BIO#Invalid criteria FunkyCanute (talk) 17:53, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: if this survives AfD, then (a) "Lady" needs to be removed from title, and (b) title and opening words of text should agree on whether she's best known as Lovell or Norreys! PamD 20:38, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I agree, notability is not inherited, up or down. The claim to notability here is for being the mother of Sir Henry Norris (courtier). I believe that there may be instances where a parent or friend is notable for their relationship with someone even more famous. This would conceivable be true where there is evidence of significant influence over the development of the subsequent individual (the mentee). In the case of Rusticus, it is clear that he had a significant, specific and documented influence over Marcus Aurelius. There is no such evidence here. While I agree that this article represents a nexus that some readers may find useful, it is not appropriate as an article about an individual. Family articles, (e.g. Rothschild family) are the appropriate way to provide that kind of nexus. Assuming the family has notability, when and if the appropriate family article exists, this article's title could be redirected to it. Meanwhile, deletion is appropriate. --Bejnar (talk) 21:13, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:41, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. I am sympathetic to the view that because the role of women in society through most of history has been different from that of men we should look for notability in different areas, but motherhood is not something that confers notability in itself. As Bejnar points out, she would have to be shown to have been notable in that role. --AJHingston (talk) 22:51, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into a family article, or delete, per Bejnar. I, too, am sympathetic to her lot in life, but unless she did something unusual for her station or gender, then she's not really notable. Bearian (talk) 19:11, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into a family article, but keep the information. MountWassen (talk) 08:47, 13 October 2012 (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.