Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anne-Marie Péladeau


 * 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 and redirect to Pierre Péladeau. To eliminate any BLP concerns, will delete the history before redirecting. If editors want to add any BLP-appropriate info about her in the target article, they are welcome to do so. RL0919 (talk) 21:52, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Anne-Marie Péladeau

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Problematic WP:BLP of a person notable only for legal troubles. Notability is not inherited, so happening to have a more notable father than most other people with arrest records does not make her special -- but neither the significance of her alleged crimes themselves, nor the amount of media coverage they're actually shown to have received, are enough to make her special either. For WP:BLPPRIVACY reasons we really just should not be maintaining this at all, as there are simply no grounds on which to claim that any of this is of enduring public interest. Bearcat (talk) 04:42, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:53, 23 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. She is also notable for the civil litigation she has been involved in over much of her adult life, such as and .   Eastmain (talk • contribs) 06:30, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Civil litigation over medical bills doesn't make a person notable either. Bearcat (talk) 08:03, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

*Keep - Eastmain makes a compelling case for notability. Per sourcing, coverage. BabbaQ (talk) 08:26, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 08:51, 23 January 2019 (UTC)

I will be truly objective as I will have to admit you are right "this" time. Davidgoodheart (talk) 10:59, 30 January 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Notability is NOT inherited. You all know that! Starting the article as “the daughter of” is the worst type of red flag. No reliable sources have been presented. (Being in a lawsuit isn’t notability unless it has national implications). Trillfendi (talk) 23:45, 23 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Pierre Péladeau, where a sentence or two about her legal & personal struggles might be appropriate. --Lockley (talk) 19:32, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED, negative bio about minor court cases. This should not be kept under any circumstances. very very weak support for a redirect to Pierre Péladeau-- D Big X ray ᗙ  05:39, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nightfury 08:31, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Pierre Péladeau, as this article is currently undersourced. I would honestly have to say that she's not really independently notable as well, so that is why I will have to go with merge and redirect, as the information about her would be good for adding solely to that article. Davidgoodheart (talk) 11:00, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. BabbaQ (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2019 (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.