Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katherine Schwarzenegger


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 02:33, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Katherine Schwarzenegger

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An editor disagrees with my tagging this for notability. I was on the fence about nominating the article, but given the disagreement, let's have a discussion. She is not notable. Simply having famous parents does not mean you should have an article. She wrote a book, which has gotten coverage, and her book may meet WP:NBOOK. She doesn't WP:INHERIT notability from either her parents or her book. Sources do exist, but like this one, they don't confer notability. Even this source is about her parents as much as its about her. The USA Today source cited in the article is the only one I see that without a doubt is significant coverage of her. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:14, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - "An editor" was me. I can fully understand why Muboshgu initially took umbrage at the article, it was previously almost entirely about her well-known family, rather than her. I was on the verge of raising an AfD myself (people certainly don't inherit notability from their relatives). However, in my view she meets the notability requirements of WP:NAUTHOR, because her book has been featured/reviewed in at least three reliable, independent news sources, maybe more. She created the book so she does inherit notability from this work. Sionk (talk) 18:46, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per Sionk. Of course any child of a famous person sources will talk about that famous person in whatever they do it can't be avoided. --  Green  C  04:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000(talk) 08:27, 7 February 2014 (UTC)




 * Delete per precedent set at Articles for deletion/Al Gore III (8th nomination), among others. When a famous relative receives coverage wholly independent of their relation, then an article can be created.  A trivial book would never have received a lick of coverage if it wasn't for her last name.  This isn't enough, not by a long shot. Tarc (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - while I don't like the idea of our celebutante-loving culture, it is what it is. This article meets WP:GNG. There have been reviews of her book.  She has appeared on major "news" TV shows to push its sales. Bearian (talk) 22:56, 11 February 2014 (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.