Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:27, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen

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

Pages exist at Mary-Kate Olsen and Ashley Fuller Olsen. There was some general consensus on the talk page that there be separate pages. What's keeping us from deleting this or creating some sort of a disambiguation page? It seems redundant. Mrmewe (talk) 02:05, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, for much the same reason as we have an article on Morecambe and Wise as well as separate articles on Eric Morecambe and Ernie Wise - the partnership was notable (and, notability being permanent, is notable) independently of its two independently notable members. Interested editors (and I'm not one - it's the potential precedent here that concerns me) should obviously be taking care that information in this article (and links to the article) relate only to the partnership and not to the sisters' subsequent separate careers, but that is a matter of routine editing, not deletion. PWilkinson (talk) 10:34, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for much the same reason as we have an article on Abbott and Costello as well as separate articles on Bud Abbott and Lou Costello — the partnership was notable (and, notability being permanent, is notable) independently of its two independently notable members. PWilkinson FTW. Carrite (talk) 15:44, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for the reasons cited above. The article(its intro, at least) does need to be rewritten such that it is clearly an article on the partnership rather than a joint bio on the two Olsens, though. The Abbott and Costello article is a pretty good example of how this should be done.--Martin IIIa (talk) 18:25, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable partnerships and groups (look at music groups) are standard procedure. Even successful twins working as a group (Bob and Mike Bryan) also have individual articles.Trackinfo (talk) 20:29, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Question/Comment Should the page continue even if the partnership has, for all intents and purposes, split? They seem to be going their separate ways these days. Mrmewe (talk) 22:18, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, if the partnership terminates, then the article just has an end-point. Carrite (talk) 04:33, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:10, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We have articles on Abbott and Costello, even though both of them are dead. So that partnership has ended. 184.144.163.181 (talk) 05:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Notability of the team of Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen has long been established and, per WP:NTEMP, such notability does not go away if a team splits up... or if team members die... or if there are seperate articles on team members. Add Martin and Lewis and Laurel and Hardy to the list of precedents of where we have a team article as well as articles on team members. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:16, 12 May 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.