415:. It's worth reading those and seeing how they directly apply here. This is a text-book example of how those guidelines work. Your links support the guidelines in that the first link is trivial, giving no explanation of notability, while the second two show her as Prince's wife. It is ironic that the third one is pitched at the idea that her and Jo Wood are trying to be recognised for themselves rather than for being the wives of famous people - yet the article wouldn't be written if they were not the wives of famous people! If you have a link that demonstrates or explains Manuela Testolini's notability other than being the wife of Prince, and were able to use that to build an article on Manuela Testolini to show how notable she is, then you can do that at any time. In the meantime it is more appropriate to redirect her name to the section in the Prince article in which it is mentioned that he married and divorced her. That, after all, is the sum total of her notability at this point. I hope that is clear. If you wish to have further explanation on how we decide notability please get in touch with me on my talk page. Regards
407:
consensus, gone through a process whereby we can agree a person's "notability". A situation that often arises is that a person is in the news for one event, or for being associated in some way with a notable person. We have talked through this multiple times and by consensus agreed that a person who is notable for one event (such as marrying a notable person) and for whom reliable sources mention mainly in the context of that event (in this case marrying Prince), that that person would be mentioned in the context of that event (or person) in the notable event or person's article. I gave a link to the guideline on this:
296:. The proper forum for discussing a potential merge is the articles talkpage, and in this case a quick Google News search will show that there is plenty of information on this subject out there to expand the article such that it would not be appropriate to merge. Finally, merging and deleting are mutually contradictory, as to merge the content into the Prince article and then delete this article would violate the terms of the
377:
232:
406:
Certainly. Your first link is trivial - merely confirming that
Manuela Testolini exists. It is important that a topic be verifiable for Knowledge - however, by consensus we have gone beyond mere verifiability to the position that a person has to be "notable" to have a stand alone article. We have, by
170:
The first article referenced is little more than a list of every woman Prince ever slept with, the others are blurbs about the divorce filing with the appropriate "we want to stay friends" quotes. Relationship does not confer notability. She should be a blurb in the list of his wives/girlfriends on
319:
I realise this is
Articles for Deletion, seeing as I nominated it for deletion in the first place, but thanks for the clarification. Suggesting ad nauseum that this person triggers hits on Google News does not mean they deserve their own Knowledge article. A search of my own name on Google News
196:
Can easily be worked into the main Prince article. There's no need for a stub article on her, she is not of any notability except for once being in a relationship with Prince. The fact that she is a CEO is not relevant to
Knowledge, there are thousands of CEOs without their own articles.
291:
This is
Articles for Deletion, not Articles for Cleanup; the only question we address here is whether the subject matter is appropriate for an article, or to put it another way, whether it is possible to write an article on this topic which meets our
267:
As all those in favour of deleting have said above, merging is an option. She just does not warrant her own article. ALL of the information in the article is available in the Prince article.
320:
triggers three charity events I took part in where I raised a fairly large amount of money. You do not however see me campaigning for my own
Knowledge article using this twisted logic.
122:
89:
84:
321:
268:
198:
93:
76:
17:
384:
183:
240:
469:
36:
468:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
451:
428:
393:
371:
329:
325:
314:
276:
272:
258:
223:
206:
202:
188:
162:
143:
58:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
238:
152::I have no clue why this was nominated but it should not have been. Well sourced, well known person. Passes
80:
244:, which is just the tip of the iceberg. If this article does not develop more than a stub we can merge to
130:
157:
388:
309:
253:
249:
248:, but this topic is incontestably notable in its own right. Delete !votes that fail to address the
134:
447:
425:
368:
234:
219:
179:
214:
The third web link is hardly more than a stub. Notability is not established by this reference.
355:
72:
64:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
408:
347:
376:
Can you please clarify why you think this topic is not independently notable in light of
49:
443:
418:
412:
361:
351:
215:
173:
153:
293:
110:
381:
242:
236:
442:
Knowledge is not a crystal ball on a person's future success or 'potential.'
245:
462:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
297:
117:
106:
102:
98:
308:!votes. Hope this clears up the confusion for you,
252:of the article do not carry any weight. Sincerely,
354:apply here. Delete contents and redirect title to
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
472:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
231:Two seconds of Google News searching yields
387:in multiple reliable sources? Thanks,
156:. All the article needs is a cleanup.
7:
411:. I also gave a link to the related
24:
250:potential, not just current state
356:Prince_(musician)#Personal_life
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
413:Knowledge:Bio#Invalid_criteria
352:Knowledge:Bio#Invalid_criteria
1:
129:Finishing incomplete nom for
489:
452:04:31, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
429:09:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
394:22:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
372:22:42, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
330:14:29, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
315:19:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
277:14:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
259:11:48, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
224:08:52, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
207:20:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
189:20:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
163:19:05, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
144:16:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
59:14:06, 29 June 2008 (UTC)
465:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
131:User:92.232.121.101
44:The result was
141:
73:Manuela Testolini
65:Manuela Testolini
480:
467:
427:
421:
391:
370:
364:
312:
256:
187:
176:
160:
139:
137:
136:Ten Pound Hammer
120:
114:
96:
56:
34:
488:
487:
483:
482:
481:
479:
478:
477:
476:
470:deletion review
463:
419:
416:
389:
362:
359:
310:
254:
174:
172:
158:
135:
116:
87:
71:
68:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
486:
484:
475:
474:
457:
455:
454:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
399:
398:
397:
396:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
333:
332:
322:92.232.121.101
282:
281:
280:
279:
269:92.232.121.101
262:
261:
226:
209:
199:92.232.121.101
191:
165:
140:and his otters
127:
126:
67:
62:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
485:
473:
471:
466:
460:
459:
458:
453:
449:
445:
441:
438:
437:
430:
426:
423:
422:
414:
410:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
400:
395:
392:
386:
383:
379:
375:
374:
373:
369:
366:
365:
357:
353:
349:
346:
343:
342:
331:
327:
323:
318:
317:
316:
313:
307:
303:
299:
295:
290:
289:
288:
287:
286:
285:
284:
283:
278:
274:
270:
266:
265:
264:
263:
260:
257:
251:
247:
243:
241:
239:
237:
235:
233:
230:
227:
225:
221:
217:
213:
210:
208:
204:
200:
195:
192:
190:
185:
181:
177:
169:
166:
164:
161:
155:
151:
148:
147:
146:
145:
138:
132:
124:
119:
112:
108:
104:
100:
95:
91:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
69:
66:
63:
61:
60:
57:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
464:
461:
456:
439:
417:
360:
344:
305:
301:
300:. Thus, all
294:five pillars
228:
211:
193:
167:
149:
128:
52:
51:
45:
43:
31:
28:
304:!votes are
159:Rgoodermote
171:his page.
390:Skomorokh
311:Skomorokh
255:Skomorokh
53:Wizardman
444:Artene50
420:SilkTork
409:WP:BIO1E
385:coverage
363:SilkTork
348:WP:BIO1E
216:Artene50
175:LegoTech
123:View log
440:Comment
382:trivial
90:protect
85:history
345:Delete
246:Prince
212:Delete
194:Delete
168:Delete
154:WP:BIO
118:delete
94:delete
46:delete
302:merge
121:) – (
111:views
103:watch
99:links
16:<
448:talk
350:and
326:talk
306:keep
298:GDFL
273:talk
229:Keep
220:talk
203:talk
150:Keep
107:logs
81:talk
77:edit
378:non
182:)·(
142:•
450:)
358:.
328:)
275:)
222:)
205:)
178:·(
133:.
109:|
105:|
101:|
97:|
92:|
88:|
83:|
79:|
48:.
446:(
424:*
380:-
367:*
324:(
271:(
218:(
201:(
186:)
184:c
180:t
125:)
115:(
113:)
75:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.