206:
best known houses? -- those interested can and have debated for generations on this sort of thing, and therefore there is a very good reason for having a firm guideline to follow. I think I have a very rough understanding of the UK, but no knowledge elsewhere, and each country will be different. (In this particular case, she's from a rich but parvenue house; but it terms of prominence, and historical notability, the Astors are probably notable specifically. Others will disagree, perhaps sharply) If the guideline is to be challenged, it should be on that talk page. It makes sense to me to keep it--it does not refer to all that many people. I could understand a decision that if she married into a non-noble family, and her children were not noble, then her children would not get articles of their own.
175:
per nom; notability isn't venereal, and the sum total of this lady's life seems to be that she was born a minor member of the
British aristocracy, married a minor member of the British aristocracy, and had a couple kids. Frankly, I'd be curious as to the grounds upon which the prod was contested.
445:
right, there ought to be no discrimination against major historical figures of past periods. We have , besides minor state politicians, many articles about 20th century heirs and heiresses of no importance whatsoever except their money. This is not an argument that othercrapexists, as I have ben
205:
It would have been contested on the basis of being opposed to long-standing policy. I'm not sure what distinguishes a minor member; even if it were decided that mere UK Barons are not all notable, then do we include the richer? the ones with the longest lineage? the ones that are offshoots of the
188:
per nom. I do not agree with the contention expressed on the guideline for nobility talk page that everyone with a title is inherently notable and that their spouses are as well. However, she is presently the wife of a fairly important politician, so I wold expect she has been written about, so
260:
as per DGG above. The UK nobility is small enough that we'll never get 10,000 articles cluttering up the encyclopedia, and (for better or worse) is still of interest to a lot of people. Elected hereditary peers are rare enough (there are only 92 of them) that to be both the daughter of one and
355:. Personally, though, I think this issue should be decided by English editors. Those of us in countries without an established nobility probably don't know how inherently notable a hereditary peer is. I'm sure the article can be expanded - she must be patron of lots of things.
261:
married to another is interesting in itself, whilst the Astors are an interesting family. I agree it could be expanded with some details of what she's actually done in her own right, but that's not grounds for deleting it.
371:, an article which can easily contain a line or two of information such as parentage for all minor members of the family. This is a widely-accepted solution for the "family notable, member not" dilemma. --
240:
Considering the inconclusiveness of discussion on the actual policy pages, this seems to be where policy is made. Of course, there's nothing to stop us from changing direction. </personal view: -->
96:
91:
100:
407:
83:
220:
I'm hunting for the policy you cite, and if I'm missing the obvious I apologize, but I'm afraid I can't find it. Could you please put up a link to it for participants to look at?
330:. Being part of a notable family doesn't in and of itself make one notable. I'd imagine there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Astors in this world. Do they all get articles?
130:
Contested prod. While nobility is, I suppose, assertion enough of notability to prevent speedy, I can find absolutely nothing to indicate that this person actually is notable.
436:- we have kept some nutty one election politicians recently, surely someone who's house was used for the greatest 20th century British poltical scandal is notable? Rgds, -
123:
401:
87:
397:
388:
79:
71:
464:
452:
426:
414:
391:
379:
359:
347:
319:
286:
246:
226:
212:
197:
180:
167:
149:
or merit inclusion in
Knowledge. For what it is worth, I was the one that contested the prod. I knda wanted to gauge community feelings here.
136:
65:
446:
questioning the N of the politicians here, and will soon start asking about the heirs. Those articles shouldn't exist. This one should.
189:
someone might be able to find articles about her activities sufficient to justify an article. The wife of U.S. politician Joe
Lieberman,
410:) just opined "strong keep" in 27 AFD discussions over a period of 35 minutes, several times with clearly disruptive rationales.
17:
342:
479:
36:
478:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
162:
276:
422:
Baroness is not a royal title, at least not in the UK. It's a noble title, which is not the same thing. --
387:
as for the love of God a baroness, someone with a royal title, is significant and part of a lineage! --
264:
423:
311:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, If you have any questions, please contact me at
376:
312:
221:
190:
150:
131:
338:
59:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
437:
177:
372:
356:
316:
146:
461:
411:
368:
331:
51:
117:
306:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
239:
Conclusion of every AfD on these topics in last 6 months. <personal view: -->
194:
298:, even if by affinity, and that's enough for me. 23:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
448:
242:
208:
145:. I agree that this person's lineage and spouse are not enough to pass
472:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
193:, has an article, for instance, with only 2 references.
113:
109:
105:
294:
as per comments above on
British nobility. She's an
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
482:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
80:Elizabeth Astor, Baroness Astor of Hever
72:Elizabeth Astor, Baroness Astor of Hever
7:
398:Wikipedian, Historian, and Friend?
389:Wikipedian, Historian, and Friend?
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
499:
465:15:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
453:02:54, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
427:01:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
415:17:00, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
392:16:50, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
380:13:33, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
360:11:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
348:09:04, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
320:06:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
66:16:52, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
287:21:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
247:05:34, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
227:22:06, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
213:21:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
198:21:20, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
181:16:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
168:11:55, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
137:01:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
475:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
460:per DGG & others.
191:Hadassah Lieberman
417:
346:
322:
283:
225:
166:
135:
490:
477:
396:
336:
334:
310:
307:
285:
282:
277:
274:
269:
224:
160:
158:
154:
134:
121:
103:
62:
54:
34:
498:
497:
493:
492:
491:
489:
488:
487:
486:
480:deletion review
473:
332:
305:
278:
270:
265:
262:
156:
152:
94:
78:
75:
60:
52:
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
496:
494:
485:
484:
468:
467:
455:
440:
431:
430:
429:
424:Metropolitan90
419:
418:
382:
362:
350:
324:
323:
309:
301:
300:
299:
289:
254:
253:
252:
251:
250:
249:
232:
231:
230:
229:
200:
183:
170:
128:
127:
74:
69:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
495:
483:
481:
476:
470:
469:
466:
463:
459:
456:
454:
451:
450:
444:
441:
439:
435:
432:
428:
425:
421:
420:
416:
413:
409:
406:
403:
399:
395:
394:
393:
390:
386:
383:
381:
378:
374:
370:
366:
363:
361:
358:
354:
351:
349:
344:
340:
335:
329:
326:
325:
321:
318:
314:
308:
303:
302:
297:
293:
290:
288:
284:
281:
280:(talk to me!)
275:
273:
268:
259:
256:
255:
248:
245:
244:
238:
237:
236:
235:
234:
233:
228:
223:
222:Seraphimblade
219:
216:
215:
214:
211:
210:
204:
201:
199:
196:
192:
187:
184:
182:
179:
174:
171:
169:
164:
159:
155:
148:
144:
141:
140:
139:
138:
133:
132:Seraphimblade
125:
119:
115:
111:
107:
102:
98:
93:
89:
85:
81:
77:
76:
73:
70:
68:
67:
64:
63:
57:
56:
55:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
474:
471:
457:
447:
442:
433:
404:
384:
369:Astor family
364:
352:
327:
313:my talk page
304:
295:
291:
279:
271:
266:
257:
241:
217:
207:
202:
185:
172:
151:
142:
129:
58:
50:
49:
45:
43:
31:
28:
385:Strong Keep
203:Strong Keep
438:Trident13
317:Ian Manka
178:RGTraynor
408:contribs
373:Dhartung
357:StAnselm
163:ahoy hoy
157:american
124:View log
462:Johnbod
443:Comment
412:Uncle G
333:szyslak
218:Comment
97:protect
92:history
53:Majorly
328:Delete
267:irides
195:Edison
186:Delete
173:Delete
147:WP:BIO
143:Delete
101:delete
61:(hot!)
365:Merge
296:Astor
272:centi
153:young
118:views
110:watch
106:links
16:<
458:Keep
434:Keep
402:talk
377:Talk
353:Keep
292:Keep
258:Keep
114:logs
88:talk
84:edit
46:keep
449:DGG
367:to
263:-
243:DGG
209:DGG
122:– (
375:|
341:,
315:.
116:|
112:|
108:|
104:|
99:|
95:|
90:|
86:|
48:.
405:·
400:(
345:)
343:c
339:t
337:(
165:)
161:(
126:)
120:)
82:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.