Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diana Rauner

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. (non-admin closure) sst ✈ 04:13, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Diana Rauner

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

Notability is not inherited; subject is not "incumbent" (never elected) and sole claim to notability is as the spouse of a notable individual. No content in article. Fails WP:GNG Scr★pIron^IV 15:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I'm finding plenty of third party sources ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]). Granted, "First Lady" isn't an elected office, but it's nearly certain to attract some attention. --Non-Dropframe _talk 17:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. --Non-Dropframe _talk 17:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. --Non-Dropframe _talk 17:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. --Non-Dropframe _talk 17:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Bruce Rauner in any case as she's going to be best known through him. SwisterTwister talk 06:48, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is no issue with a redirect if there is actual content; however, the article does not say anything. If content is actually added from the sources provided by the Keep !votes, then there may be some value. As it stands, it is an empty article with inadequate sourcing, and a redirect and merge is useless, as there is nothing to merge. Scr★pIron^IV 14:45, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:47, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:00, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability is not inherited means that being related to someone notable does not automatically confer notability. Inclusion always depends on significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. The sources cited in the expanded article, combined with those identified by Non-Dropframe (except the WBEZ one, which is just a passing mention) are compelling evidence that she meets WP:BASIC. Worldbruce (talk) 09:33, 11 October 2015 (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.