Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cassandra Delaney

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. There is general consensus that there is sourcing available to show Delaney is independently notable. Improvements to the article can be done in the normal way. Barkeep49 (talk) 23:09, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cassandra Delaney

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Subject only seems to be notable for marrying, and later divorcing, John Denver. Two-sentence article with one source, which is an interview she did about the above-stated relationship. Fails WP:BASIC and WP:INVALIDBIO as notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:22, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 02:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep based on the movies she was in. The movies she played in make her notable enough for a wikipedia article, but the article needs serious work. Would not be opposed to someone fixing it up in a Draft attempt. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elijahandskip (talk • contribs)
Keep There seem to be enough sources out there to be able to flesh this out to a non-stub length. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:27, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Joe (talk) 12:38, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. Yet another display of deletionist misogyny, insisting that a woman with a famous spouse does not merit an independent article without evidencing the smallest shred of effort to assess the subject's individual notability. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by many administrators since 2006. Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong! (talk) 00:50, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, this AfD has nothing to do with gender, it was purely policy based. Please see deletion rationale and the state of the page when I nominated. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BASIC. And being the spouse of a famous musician does not confer notability. KidAd talk 04:32, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

... and as I've recently said, and per policy (WP:INVALIDBIO), that does not actually imply deletion. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:50, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per discussion and obvious notability in her own right. Randy Kryn (talk) 22:18, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Randy Kryn, her notability is hardly obvious when the entirety of the prose of the article (and its lone reference) refers only to her relationship with Denver, which is why I invoked WP:NOTINHERITED as part of my deletion rationale. See the state of the page when I nominated. I would also argue that even with the state of the page as it is now, her notability is not obvious as she is still "best known for her marriage to and bitter divorce from American singer John Denver." PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 03:03, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your reply comes after my reply to Trillfendi below, which covers this concern. But I'll repeat some of it. Basically, she starred in the 1986 cult-classic film Fair Game, playing the lead, a film that Quentin Tarantino (who knows his cult classics) "enthused" about. This starring role in what is now a cult classic, combined with her other film credits and the then allowable and Wikipedia permissible addition of her noteworthy marriage (as outlined in the policy linked above by Ritchie333), seems to easily pass this page into the 'Keep' column. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:13, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The misogyny here is that someone would devote an article to solely being someone’s ex-wife. An atrocity like this. “A brief singing career” (unexplained) nor selected film credits show notability itself without reliable sources. Trillfendi (talk) 22:59, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability comes with her starring in the cult classic Fair Game (1986) which, as the page text says, "Quentin Tarantino enthuses about the movie in the 2008 documentary Not Quite Hollywood". She has the lead in the film. That, along with her other films, can then be Wikipedia-legitimately added to (as pointed out by Ritchie333's comment and link above) the information about her controversial and noteworthy marriage, which at that point adds weight to the notability of the subject. Randy Kryn (talk) 04:00, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article need a lot of work, but I think it squeaks past the notability line. // Timothy :: talk 20:29, 18 September 2020 (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.