Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Caroline Fox


 * 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. Geschichte (talk) 16:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Caroline Fox

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Another member of the non-notable Fox family of Falmouth (see also deletion discussions for Barclay, Alfred and Samuel Middleton. Wikipedia is not WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Non-notable author with most of the sources coming from her own essays. Penale52 (talk) 17:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:ANYBIO as the subject of an entry in the Dictionary of National Biography. That entry was included and updated in Oxford's contemporary edition and she also has a chapter in the Oxford Companion to English Literature to boot . Please look into the subject of an article WP:BEFORE you nominate it for deletion. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 18:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, WP:ANYBIO says someone is likely to be notable if they are chronicled in something like the Dictionary of National Biography, not guaranteed to be. This reads like a love letter to this person, and it seems her journal extracts Memories of Old Friends would be the source of most of her notability, but even that lacks an article. Penale52 (talk) 18:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, in this case the likelihood of notability is confirmed by at least two three other encyclopedia entries besides DNB: the Oxford Companion I mentioned above; this in Women in World History; and this. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, or in this case "other stuff (i.e., Memories of Old Friends) does not exist" is not an argument for deleting this article. It is an argument for creating another. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 20:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

So Keep, obviously.Bmcln1 (talk) 19:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per AleatoryPonderings. Mccapra (talk) 19:45, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, meets WP:ANYBIO, entry in a dnb plus is included in others as brought out above, if nominator had concerns with this article, probably better if they had improved/tagged it rather than wasted afd editors' time with this one. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Presence in a DNB is strong evidence of notability. pburka (talk) 13:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as passes WP:BASIC with multiple reliable book sources coverage, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 17:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, for the reasons of those who want to keep this article. Davidgoodheart (talk) 01:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. A DNB entry is clearly sufficient to establish notability per WP:ANYBIO. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:45, 19 January 2022 (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.