Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberta McCain

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. j⚛e decker^talk 15:58, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Roberta McCain (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Nominating this for AfD since CSD A7 was declined. She fails WP:ANYBIO, little to no assertion of significance beyond McCain relations. Also nominating because of WP:NOTNEWS, which indicates even when an event is notable, individuals involved in it may not be. Since she doesn't seem to be involved in much beyond her son's presidential campaign, seems like a case of WP:BIO1E. Many reports on her are from those closely affiliated with her (i.e. her son's own writings), therefore not giving much independent coverage. Since most coverage on her pertains to her son John McCain, this article should be either redirected to that or deleted. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 03:12, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Given that a CSD A7 was completely off base for this subject, I doubt the reasoning for this nomination. VMS Mosaic (talk) 10:20, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - One article about her husband and a news item about a head injury does not show any notability. Could be notable if husband or son was king or sultan, due to royal titles, or if she painted or did something else other than being a wife and mother (which are very important occupations in life but not enough for entering WP). --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 11:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:40, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - So the nominator is fine with the notability of John Kerry's mother, but this one is a speedy delete? You must be at least convinced enough to upload a fair use photo of her. --Dual Freq (talk) 14:38, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:WAX is an argument to avoid in deletion discussions as it does not solely determine a subject's notability. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to see where you draw the line, I don't see much difference between the two women's notability. --Dual Freq (talk) 15:02, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again, WP:WAX is not the point of AfD's. Roberta lacks notability due to WP:NOTNEWS and since most of her coverage is from primary sources (i.e. self-written pieces, interviews, etc.) and pieces written by those closely affiliated with her (namely her son). XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Sorry, I'm not convinced, especially considering the apparent double standard regarding John Kerry's mother by the nominator. WP:BIO leads that the subject must be "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded." Just a few points to that end: Jay Leno thought Roberta McCain was interesting and notable enough to spend nearly 8 minutes with her on his show even after her son's presidential campaign was over. Her comments on the appearance were enough to generate minor political news and were important enough for various media groups to comment on. A number of major newspapers in the US thought she was interesting or unusual enough to note her 100th birthday and 102nd birthday. Her wedding was interesting or unusual enough to be noted in newspapers in 1933. The New York Times thought she was interesting and unique enough to tell of her extensive travels with her twin sister and other family. When she passes, I have no doubt that she will be interesting and unique enough for major US Media organizations to publish her obituary and note her death. I think she's notable enough that an average person would expect to find an article on wikipedia about her and John McCain's article is large enough as it is without adding to it with her material. --Dual Freq (talk) 17:28, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I assure you there is no "double standard". Remember that WP:WAX ("What about X") is still an argument to avoid for deletion discussions. So are WP:ATTP (Arguments to the person), WP:INTEREST, and WP:INTHENEWS. Note that interviews are not third-party sources. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 17:52, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for the reasons given by Dual Freq (and not finding the nom v convincing). Eustachiusz (talk) 19:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• It's one thing if you don't find my rationale convincing, but as I told Dual Freq, WP:WAX, WP:ATTP, WP:INTEREST, and WP:INTHENEWS are arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. One thing I hadn't mentioned before is how the raw number of sources mentioning a subject is not by itself an indicator of notability per WP:MASK and WP:HITS. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:47, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep mother of John McCain, oldest active US politician, informative text and so on. Why despiting this hard work? Should be kept for our offspring --109.41.80.68 (talk) 07:06, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• There is no "despiting", and WP:EFFORT is an argument to avoid. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 07:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep She played an active role during the political life of her husband ann her son. It is covered with reliable sources as Associated Press, Los Angeles Times, The New York Times and CNN. It is linked to by 72 other aticles. It was already uncontested for almost seven years. It got 129 users who edited it. Keeping it is the only possible outcome. Regards,Jeff5102 (talk) 07:33, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone is disputing that reliable sources talk about her. The problem being overlooked is how she fails WP:BIO for little to no assertion of independent notability. We don't even know what occupations she has held. The amount of users who have edited a page or how many others link to it or how long it has lasted do not solely affect a subject's notability. Most reliable sources that address her are mainly about son/husband, anyway. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 07:48, 28 May 2014 (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.