Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cate Edwards (3rd nomination)

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 no consensus. Sources are just barely sufficient, but WP:NOTINHERITED puts her under a cloud. For the third time, a consensus does not seem to have emerged, I'm afraid. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cate Edwards

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

Not a notable person, although probably a good one. She is known only for her role as the daughter of John and Elizabeth Edwards. The article has been nominated for deletion twice and kept as "no consensus" both times. Looking at the opinions expressed in the discussions it probably should have been deleted. Borock (talk) 09:09, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Seems to have achieved some minimum notability in her own right, with political, business and charitable activities. Jonathanwallace (talk) 15:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete she has a nice job, did well in school, and is engaged to her boyfriend. Her parents should be proud of her, but she's done nothing notable in the encyclopedic sense. We need to be extremely careful with articles on kids of politicians and such as they often turn into WP:BLP minefields. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:12, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Has notable parents, but there's no such thing as notability-by-association. Fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. Perhaps she'll become notable in the future, but has not done so yet. Qworty (talk) 18:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I think she's a wonderful person (passion of her mother with the comfort speaking in public of her father), but isn't notable in her own right at this time. You wouldn't create a page for her siblings, but what has she done that is any more notable than Jack (graduating, having a job, and being engaged aren't sufficient). -Jcbarr (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Has achieved some notability on her own merits via with political, business and charitable activities.--BabbaQ (talk) 16:59, 22 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 17:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment BabbaQ, do you have anything to back your assertions up? It's not obvious where you're drawing this from. 18:57, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Delete. If she wasn't the daughter of someone well-known she wouldn't be in the slightest notable. Many people are successful in their careers, but it doesn't make them notable enough for an article on Wikipedia. -- Necrothesp (talk) 23:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to John Edwards#Family. When we talk about notability not being inherited with regard to relatives of famous people, it should be noted that there are some people who have become the subjects of intense media attention mostly because of their relationship to famous people and not anything they have done themselves (example: David Kennedy). In such cases, the significant media coverage of the relative may be enough to satisfy the general notability guideline. But Cate Edwards has not come under such intense media attention. Instead, she has merely received some incidental media coverage due to her connections to her parents. Therefore, we should redirect this article, leaving the possibility of re-creation open should she achieve sufficient notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:06, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per BabbaQ. She's not famous by herself, but I think she barely passes due to the large number of reliable sources cited. This is a marginal case and by no means an easy delete. Alternately, merge all citations into John Edwards#Family. Bearian (talk) 23:16, 31 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep though agree she isn't especially notable, there's enough coverage out there about her to allow her to scrape by.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 02:10, 1 February 2011 (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.