Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carol Paul

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 Delete. Editors are free to create a redirect if it is deemed useful. Pastordavid (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Carol Paul

Completing unfinished nom by User:Burzmali. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 00:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC) No notability on her own, medical information isn't appropriate and might need oversighting, fails WP:BLP1E. Burzmali (talk) 00:38, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Oversight - While the health info is probably not appropriate for a Wikipedia article, the article is does not appear to be approriate for Wikipedia either. Oversight removes individual edits from an article's history so they are not available for review. Per Wikipedia:Oversight there are three reasons to use this feature, none of which apply here as the content is released as public knowledge as shown in the reference in the article.
- 1 Removal of nonpublic personal information such as phone numbers, home addresses, workplaces or identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who have not made their identity public.
- 2 Removal of potentially libellous information either: a) on the advice of Wikimedia Foundation counsel or b) when the subject has specifically asked for the information to be expunged from the history, the case is clear, and there is no editorial reason to keep the revision.
- 3 Removal of copyright infringement on the advice of Wikimedia Foundation counsel.
- Jeepday (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Just being married to someone notable doesn't make her notable. She doesn't seem to have done anything noteworthy, and the sources all seem to be about them as a couple and not her specifically. Mention in Ron Paul's article, and delete this. TJ Spyke 00:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Ron Paul Same as what Tj Spyke said. Soxred93 | talk count bot 00:18, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subject is not notable. ("That a person has a relationship with a well-known person is not a reason for a standalone article; see Relationships do not transfer notability.") --Newsroom hierarchies (talk) 00:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per User:Newsroom hierarchies, the article itself makes no assertion of notability independent of Ron Paul. --- tqbf 01:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Ron Paul. No evidence of individual notability. JJL (talk) 02:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Ron Paul per above. SeanMD80^{talk | contribs} 02:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Feedback ^☎ 02:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:N same as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Whitney Gravel indicates lack of support for "Just being the wife of a candidate" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeepday (talk • contribs) 04:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, notability is not inherited, merely being married to a possible candidate for high office isn't enough to satisfy WP:N. Lankiveil ^{(complaints | disco)} 12:32, 19 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Delete as she doesn't seem to have done anything noteworthy, with a possible oversight on the health information. - Revolving Bugbear 21:25, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge any relevant information to Ron Paul, and delete. She's not notable in her own right, and notability is not inherited. Terraxos (talk) 07:31, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable (not transferable from her husband). Merge not necessary as it is expected that Ron Paul's bio will include extensive coverage of her. Ref ^(chew)(do) 00:29, 21 January 2008 (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.