Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica 'Jecca' Craig

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:02, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica 'Jecca' Craig

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

Contested PROD. Article is about someone whose only claim to notability is that she is a former girlfriend of Prince William, Duke of Cambridge and from a notable family. Notability is not inherited, and she has no claim to notability in her own right. Of Prince Willam's former girlfriends only Isabella Calthorpe has her own article, and that's because she is a notable model and actress.

Note: Jessica Craig was created in 2007 and soon after redirected to Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. role^player 17:44, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. GF's, etc. of the royal prince are of historical interest. Some people are interested enough in this subject that they draw newspaper space. You-all may question whther this confirs "notability", but this is a general encyclopedia.Maxdlink (talk) 19:43, 4 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:26, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: However, the only thing in her article that she's known for is for dating Prince William. I'm searching and other than old articles that talk about the two of them breaking up, there is absolutely zero coverage of her since then. Isn't that the epitome of WP:BIO1E? She's only famous for one thing and only briefly famous at that. I'm leaning towards just redirecting this to Prince William. I don't think there's anything here that couldn't be best covered in his own article about his past relationships.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:10, 5 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]
Redirect to Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. She's only known for dating Prince William and after they split she didn't really get any more public attention. The only other coverage she received was from the "look at the women Wills could have married" articles that came out and none of them focused on her individually. I don't deny that people might get interested, but that in itself doesn't give her notability enough to have an article to herself. We need indepth, reliable, and consistent coverage to show that she's notable for being more than just William's girlfriend for a few months. We don't keep articles because they're useful, we keep them because they're notable and she's just not notable enough outside of her involvement with Prince William to warrant an article.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:18, 5 January 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

I would agree with the redirect. The problem is that our article on Prince William, Duke of Cambridge doesn't mention this person. A reader who would type 'Jessica Craig' to the search box would be redirected without a single word of explanation, which is a bit confusing. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 12:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article for William's father has a section dedicated to his previous relationships before his marriage to Lady Diana Spencer. Would it be easy to add a similar section to William's article? -- role^player 12:48, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Easily meets the GNG with mentions in the BBC News, The New York Times, and just about every other major newspaper over a span of 2 years. Redirecting is a non-starter because Prince William's article is so long AND Jessica Craig ALREADY redirects there, yet she is not mentioned. The Steve 08:17, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That there isn't space to put the information in the target article, or that the target article to merge to does not exist, are not good reasons to keep, imo. -- role^player 21:19, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those are my reasons not to redirect. My reason to keep is Meets the GNG. Would you like links to the many news stories featuring her? I did assume that most people could find them... The Steve 07:30, 10 January 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, Bryce (talk | contribs) 03:30, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Jeez, she is mentioned in 398 articles, according to one database I looked at. What have you got to do to get a Wikipedia article these days if that doesn't get you one?? :-) She is a notable individual for having gone out with Prince William, she has been in the public eye, and is mentioned in a stack of articles. That's what happens when you go out with the future King of England, you tend to become notable. Not sure why anyone would nominate this for deletion?????? Deathlibrarian (talk) 11:05, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not 100% on this one, depends on your interpretation of "notability is not inherited". Subject came to the attention of news media through relationship BUT this led to her being the subject of coverage in reliable sources. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 11:07, 14 January 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.