Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marly Sarney


 * 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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 03:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Marly Sarney

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

AfDing this as WP:NOTINHERITED since I have a feeling a speedy will be contested. TheLongTone (talk) 14:12, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:39, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:57, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:47, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 04:42, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The spouse of a nation's executive are usually kept. In addition, the Portuguese Wikipedia entry is much more complete and includes numerous references. --Enos733 (talk) 20:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Firstly, there is no way WP:CSD would ever be appropriate in this case. SPEEDY is for cases where an article "does not indicate why its subject is important or significant". WP:A7 states "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source or does not qualify on Wikipedia's notability guidelines". Can anyone imagine nominating Michelle Obama for speedy deletion? Keep per the above. AusLondonder (talk) 22:40, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
 * KEEP I see refs during a cursory search.198.58.162.200 (talk) 01:01, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Please note that WP:NOTINHERITED contains the proviso that it "does not apply to situations where the fact of having a relationship to another person inherently defines a public position that is notable in its own right, such as a national First Lady." The article definitely needs improvement, so it should be flagged for needing additional references, but per above commenters there is evidence out there that stronger sources do exist. Bearcat (talk) 13:08, 23 March 2017 (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.