Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gillian Baverstock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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; kept by default.--Fuhghettaboutit 23:09, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gillian Baverstock

Gillian Baverstock (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Much as I love Enid Blyton's books, there does not appear to be sufficient reason to keep this article on her daughter. Connection to a famous person does not implicate notability. Icemuon 00:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete unless someone can find sources that show she was actually published. I can't come up with any. the_undertow talk 01:45, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment. I found listings for the two books at the British Library. --Eastmain 03:41, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and possible move relevant content to the mother's article. Jehochman (talk/contrib) 01:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete. Asserts no notability at all. Being the daughter of someone notable doesn't mean you get an article on Wikipedia. Sr13 (T|C) 03:18, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Being the author of two books is an assertion of notability. I added the ISBN for each book (which I found at the British Library) in order to confirm that the books are real ones. She has also been the subject of independent coverage, albeit mostly in her role as Enid Blyton's daughter. --Eastmain 04:35, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Eastmain. While being "daughter of" isn't grounds for notability by itself. In this case, it seems to be the tipping point. --Crunch 07:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, while much of the writing about her focuses on her family relationship, together with her writing credentials they're a sufficient case of notability. If not kept, it could at least be merged into Enid Blyton. - Mgm|(talk) 10:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Mergeto the Enid Blyton article. Nothing to satisfy WP:BIO. Baverstock is only mentioned in newspaper stories about mother, so anything which needs saying about her can be included in that article. The Blyton article is a bit sparse in the personal life section, so it would benefit from a merge. She seems a very ordinary person other than being the offspring of a popular author, Baverstock's own books about her mother are extremely non-notable. Having written a book which has an ISBN number does not prove notability One has no sales rank on Amazon and the other is 2.7 millionth in sales, hardly earthshaking, and clearly a million other authors are more deserving of Wikipedia articles. Edison 15:17, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. It simply isn't true that Baverstock has nothing to satisfy WP:BIO. She has been "the subject of published secondary sources"; an example of which is linked to on the page. She is well known in Enid Blyton circles and makes many public appearances at literature festivals (I've begun to add these on the page). The page does need to be expanded, but we'll struggle if it's deleted! --Richardob 12:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'd heard of her, and I think the article can be substantially expanded. Deb 21:40, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
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.