Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josephine de Gersdorff


 * 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. Sorry,, but Wikipedia has a consensus that all article subjects must have a minimum level of coverage in reliable sources to allow for an article to be created, see WP:N.  Sandstein  07:31, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Josephine de Gersdorff

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete per WP:GNG. The way it is currently written, the subject of the article is attempting to inherit notability from her father and brother. Nothing in the article really explains what makes her notable aside from her notable father and brother, which goes against WP guidelines for notability. Comatmebro User talk:Comatmebro 18:47, 5 October 2016 (UTC)


 * I am not done with this article. Josephine was my grandmother and her son, my father was the late Ben Bradlee of the Washington Post. Josephine received the French National Order of the Legion of Honor for starting an orphanage for parents during Nazi Europe to send their kids to Josephine for protection.
 * I'm sure that your grandmother was a worthy person, but that doesn't mean that she is an appropriate subject for a Wikipedia article. It appears that she was a chevalier in the Légion d'honneur, which is a higher honour than I have ever received, but, beng the fifth and lowest level of membership, is not enough to be the basis for an article in this encyclopedia. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:48, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:52, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

There are a lot of people on Wikipedia that I feel do not deserve to be on Wikipedia. In my mind setting up an orphanage to help Jewish children escape the Holocaust is a pretty notable thing. She was also a descendant of the royal and imperial house of Habsburg. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbradlee (talk • contribs) 21:30, 5 October 2016 (UTC) I also thought that she would be an important figure in woman's history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbradlee (talk • contribs) 21:32, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Having a Wikipedia article is not some kind of badge of honour for doing good works, so has nothing to do with anyone deserving anything. And being the descendant of a royal house is totally irrelevant unless that descendancy grants any official position. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:37, 5 October 2016 (UTC)

I give up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbradlee (talk • contribs) 22:53, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
 * If you can provide a sufficient amount of reliable sources it may be enough to meet WP:GNG and WP:BLP guidelines. I simply was not able to come up with anything other that what was provided. You are more than welcome to add additional information and sources to the article, there is still quite a bit of time before the page will actually be deleted, if it is determined that it should. Comatmebro  User talk:Comatmebro 02:48, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I have a few more sources. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbradlee (talk • contribs) 12:50, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Userfy and then let the editor submit it through the articles for creation process. To begin with this article seems that it should be at Josephine Bradlee since that is the name she used during her time of notable action. The article needs to say a lot less about the subjects parents, and avoid saying anything about earlier ancestors. We need statements about the subject. Right now this is a coatrack on the Gersdorff family. The editor needs to bear in mind that in Wikipedia we almost always used a subject's married name, thus we have an article title Mia Love, not under her maiden name Mia Bourdeau, or we have Hillary Clinton not Hillary Rodham.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:53, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * We use the most common name in English language sources - whether it's the maiden name or a married name. And names are not always changed after marriage btw. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I will change the name and say a lot less about her ancestors. The only reason why I did that was because I have seen some articles that mention if somebody is a descendant of somebody important or a noble. I was just then going to mention that her father was a wealthy New York lawyer and just mention her parents with the dates next to them. I was hoping to keep that her great, great grandfather was a Baron, but I will take out the rest and add more about Josephine.
 * Pls see below: Original comment; <s.Userfy as "Josephine Bradlee" -- a mess of an article which is mostly about other people. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:48, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've just spent a couple of hours digging out the sources that you cited and formatting them in a way that should make it easier for others to check them out. I've tagged a few as needing further information, such as page number, article title and year of publication. If you could supply that information, and also identify any of the sources that have more than a sentence or two about your grandmother rather than mention her in relation to other family members, then there is is a chance that we might be able to keep this article, but I'm not yet seeing any such coverage. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


 * Userfy (Updated below) and change the title is required. Personally I'm not convinced that the subject is notable. But I'm willing the give the article creator a chance. I would also prefer if the article goes through AFC and all conflict of interest is properly declared. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:08, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. I really don't see the point of userfying this. The sources cited in the article, and any that I can find elsewhere, are all passing mentions in passages about other family members, and there are over 100,000 chevaliers in the Légion d'honneur, so that doesn't come close to being a pass of WP:ANYBIO. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:58, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete (possibly userify). The French honour is not all that unusual.  A programme to rescue French children from the Nazis might be significant: I do not know how many others there were.  Being related to people who have WP articles is a classic case of notability not being inherited.  I would recommend the author to go through the formality of registering with WP and to spend a little time working on improving articles not related to his family to familiarise himself (or herself) more with the way WP operates, before returning to this article and moving it back to main space, if it is userified.  Peterkingiron (talk) 10:54, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I note that a citation has been added to page 249 of this source, which does no more than say than name the subject in a footnote as her son's mother and her grandfather's granddaughter. We need more than such barrel-scraping. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:08, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Just delete the article then. I thought that a women in those days earning the French Legion of Honor was a pretty big deal as well especially for what she did. I also thought that all people new that women did not women did not really get a chance to accomplish much in those days, which is again why I thought this would be an important article. I have also seen articles here where they talk about people with what they did, which is not that much, but they mention there very noted ancestors. So whats wrong with me doing the same? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Qbradlee34 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete on second thoughts. There's not been improvement to the article and it seems unlikely, as the subject appears to lack independent sources to confirm notability. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:39, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I wanted to give a chance but the quality of citations added make me doubt if at all significant coverage exists. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:43, 12 October 2016 (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.