Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Austin Barry

: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 delete. A redirect can be created after deletion. –Juliancolton | Talk 21:25, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

=[[Sarah Austin Barry]]=

:{{la|Sarah Austin Barry}} ([{{fullurl:Sarah Austin Barry|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sarah Austin Barry}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Delete, being a wife of someone famous doesn't make herself notable Hell In A Bucket (talk) 15:06, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete Their is no point of this article. Not notable and no references. Irunongames{{•}}play 15:22, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete Noncontroversial - she isn't notable except with respect to her husband. HeureusementIci (talk) 16:14, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete WP:CSD#A7. So tagged. Nothing in here indicates why she might be notable, and a Google book search doesn't turn up anything of interest. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:03, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete. GBooks shows trivial entries in six books, three about her conversion to Catholicism, one about her death, but all because of her husband. For someone of her times, that should mean not notable. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 17:29, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete I agree with the overall sentiment here. I was unable to find any substantial coverage...if she was really notable she would have probably shown up in the news at least once and I can't find any mentions there, either by full name or by searching "Sarah Barry" + "John Barry". Cazort (talk) 18:25, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Obvious redirect to her husband's article. Nothing notable about her. JForget 00:24, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Niteshift36 (talk) 05:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This article was speedily deleted per criterion A7 by Tiptoety at 05:38, 3 July 2009. It was then recreated by Mahsitti at 17:38, 3 July 2009, and the nominator here has opened a new AfD on the article. I've closed the latter AfD as redundant, since this one is still open. If any of those who have commented above want to check the "new version" of the article and revise their opinions, I encourge them to do so. Deor (talk) 18:35, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
  • The new version is more detailed and sourced, but, as far as I'm concerned, still fails to assert any independent significance. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • I looked again at the newer version, except one new ref, the others were included in my delete statement above, the new ref doesn't add much to the notability claim either, so I'm sticking with my earlier position. -SpacemanSpiff (talk) 16:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect Merge and redirect into the article on her husband. Avi (talk) 17:37, 7 July 2009 (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.