Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angelica Hamilton


 * 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. I think we can safely close this. Thanks to all. Drmies (talk) 18:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Angelica Hamilton

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Absolutely nothing notable about this woman, other than being the daughter of one of the greatest minds in American history.  Onel 5969  TT me 01:45, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete nothing indepedently notable about Angelica Hamilton.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - It is true that she is discussed only in sources that are principally directed to her notable parents, and it is true that notability is not inherited. Nevertheless, her mental illness and its effects on her more notable family members was at least significant enough to justify keeping and trying to expand this article (as opposed to merging content into the articles about her parents or siblings). Lwarrenwiki (talk) 03:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - I agree with Lwarrenwiki. Removing this article would mean moving the related information on the pages of her famous parents whose life was affected by her condition, thus creating an unnecessary unbalance. It would furthermore be rather odd to leave only this child of Alexander Hamilton without her page (which has btw been greatly improved since it was first created) when all her siblings have their page. Isananni (talk) 04:11, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:51, 26 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. While the WP:OSE arguments are weak, the nominator and other delete !voter overlook that notability is not necessarily something that comes from a person's own actions. Their traits or illnesses can equally be a reason to assume notability, just as long as "they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject". This is the case here. Why they covered her is not really important. Regards  So Why  16:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Fascinating history of an individual that clearly meets GNG criteria of significant coverage in multiple sources.  Montanabw (talk) 02:13, 1 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep article is well-written, well-sourced passes WP:GNG. Also, Angelica Hamilton is currently appearing on a Broadway stage in the greatest hit show of the century, admittedly, the century is only 17 years old, but the role in the show should be added to the article.  Note also that WP:NOTINHERITED states: "Individuals in close, personal relationships with famous people (including politicians) can have an independent article even if they are known solely for such a relationship, but only if they pass WP:GNG.", in other words, she doesn't have to have "done" anything.  This AfD will come out KEEP just like Articles for deletion/Mary Lincoln Beckwith did, because WP:SIGCOV.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:36, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Can we call quit? We have 5 "keep" against 2 "delete", can we remove the delete discussion template from the article and move on? Isananni (talk) 14:55, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:SNOW, next editor who comes to this page should just close this as keep.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:03, 3 October 2017 (UTC) Got my Angelicas mixed up (aunt/niece). Nevertheless, I can verify that there is renewed interest in Angelica nièce due to the Hamilton (musical). (added a coupe of sources to the page; mental health angle is interesting.)   Still thinking Keep, but I do see Nom's point that this snowball might roll all the way through enfer.E.M.Gregory (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2017 (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.