Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine P. Saxton


 * 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. This discussion establishes that this person is frequently quoted in the media, but that this is not enough for a biographical article about her.  Sandstein  08:36, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Catherine P. Saxton

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

Non-notable publicist. Sources present do not establish notability. WP:BEFORE turns up nothing else. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - Saxton is certainly widely quoted with statements along the lines of :...says Catherine Saxton, so-and-so's publicist". At the same time she appears multiple times in the 2021 book Gatecrashers (Ben Widdicombe), the New York Times quoted her in conversations about social climbers (2006), Nydia Neubauer (2002), and rent-controlled apartments (1992). There was also broader coverage about her work with the New York Pops . That being said, the previous version of the page was largely copied from imdb, and I have removed that text. DaffodilOcean (talk) 15:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I have dug deeping into the *Gatecrashers* book. She is covered on the following pages in the book: 144, 166, 171-174,226, 236-237. More details are in the page DaffodilOcean (talk) 04:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * A few more citations - most notable is her work on the Vietnam Veterans parade and 2004 events prior to the elections. Aside from the interview in the Irish Connections, I cannot find any single article solely focused on her. DaffodilOcean (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:10, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete - There is good RS here, I am just concerned she is only mentioned peripherally in some of it, and there isn't much solid commentary on her establishing her notability. Close but not quite. Deathlibrarian (talk) 23:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete Unfortunately. I, too, find only short quotes (e.g. one line) from her in articles about events or famous people. She doesn't seem to have rated anyone writing about her other than a short obit. She does seem to have had an interesting life and to have worked with many famous folks. It may be normal for her role as an agent to have stayed in the background except to give media quotes/sound bites, but it doesn't meet our notability requirements. Lamona (talk) 04:43, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * - are you able to access the Gatecrashers book as that is multiple pages on her? DaffodilOcean (talk) 11:13, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, and basically she is mentioned in one or two sentences on 5 pages. It's stuff like "I met CS at the bar...". Then there are about two pages where he describes her life (I'm looking at the ebook so "pages" is a guess - it's about 2 columns on my tablet and could probably fit on a single printed page.) But she's a very minor character and I don't see enough here to to reach notability. Also, this is a pretty light-weight "tell-all" gossip book, so even if some "facts" are revealed I'm not sure how seriously we can take them. Look, I definitely think she is an interesting person and her life story would be fascinating, but so far I don't see it. Lamona (talk) 18:35, 2 February 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.