Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Betty Currie


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Erik9 (talk) 02:41, 10 May 2009 (UTC)

Betty Currie

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete. This is a textbook WP:BLP1E example, if even notable for that. JBsupreme (talk) 23:05, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Strong Keep Fix the problems then. She was a secretary for a U.S. President with plenty of coverage in the media. Notability is a lock and this is not the appropriate forum to address BLP concerns.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:17, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - It doesn't sound like you understand what was being said by citing WP:BLP1E as the deletion rationale. It means the nominator thinks she was notable only for one event. I suggest you read the relevant section. Lady  of  Shalott  03:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I completely understand, but there are better ways to fix an article than downright deletion. I stand by my rationale for keeping.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 06:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Sources cited in the article do not encompass the entirety of sourcing on the subject. Also, BLP1E was dealt a fatal blow by the 2008 election.  I don't think it reflects current practice to delete or merge heavily sourced articles solely due to the nature of the subject's fame.  As a note, this discussion was previously closed and the closure was discussed on AN/I where an administrator decided to re-open it.  Please consider this if you are contemplating closing the debate early. Protonk (talk) 03:32, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep (would be Speedy keep but for previous speedy close) Clearly notable, masses of press coverage at the time. If it needs more references, they are out there (per Protonk). ukexpat (talk) 03:36, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  — Lady  of  Shalott  03:47, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - clearly notable for more than one event. Lady  of  Shalott  03:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. In what way, LadyofShallot? Although we have an article about Obama's personal secretary (for whom the notability looks a little iffy to me), we appear to lack ones for the personal secretaries of both Bushes, of Reagan, of Carter, and, as near as I can tell, of any other president, which would suggest that the position is not an inherently notable one. How does Currie's notability, if she is in fact notable, derive from anything other than her tangential involvement in the Lewinsky affair? Deor (talk) 04:40, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * On further review, I see that we do have a few articles about earlier presidents' personal secretaries—Tobias Lear V, Ann C. Whitman, Marguerite LeHand, and perhaps a few others. But my question remains. Deor (talk) 04:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The personal secretary to the president is an important figure. True, the article needs a little editing: The Lewinsky  part should be have considerably less emphasis.DGG (talk) 04:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Some personal secretaries manage to become public figures, and I think Currie is one of them. Cf. Rose Mary Woods and the three listed above: Tobias Lear V, Ann C. Whitman and Marguerite LeHand. EdJohnston (talk) 05:56, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep If it's textbook BLP1E then merger is indicated, not deletion. Take it to WP:MRFD. Colonel Warden (talk) 08:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep A personal secretary to the President nominated for AfD? That's unheard of! Guy0307 (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Passes WP:BIO. Iowateen (talk) 15:48, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Seems her job gives low notability, and combined with her "one-event" coverage, it just about adds up to pass WP:bio.YobMod 10:34, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep is notable by virtue of the sourcing. Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:26, 8 May 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.