Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olga Clark


 * 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. SoWhy 11:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Olga Clark

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG; subject does not have significant coverage about her nor did contribute to anything widely recognized per WP:ANYBIO. Being a relative of a famous chess player does not confer notability WP:INVALIDBIO. What are your thoughts? Damselfly7 ( talk ) 00:30, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete- seems as though her claim to notability is that she wrote articles about her husband, who played chess. Sources are in reference to her husband. Unless I'm msising something ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  01:00, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is somewhat interesting that she appears to have lived to be 106, but that falls short of the supercentarian standard, so we are left with nothing upon which to hang notability. bd2412  T 01:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
 * !Vote withdrawn on the basis of continuing improvement to the article. bd2412  T 02:24, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Her claim of notability is as a muse, similar to Lou Andreas-Salomé and to Alma Mahler, who were also artists, but whose most notable aspect is as muses. She lived to 95, not to 106 (there was an earlier typo in the date of birth). I read the references to be about her personally, not her husbands, although it is about her in relation to her famous husbands.In particular, the chapter about her in "Russian Silhouettes" (where she is the seventh of the "Russian Silhouettes") almost hardly talks about Capablanca at all, except as a canvas on which to tell a story about Olga. I claim notability based on her having been written about in the linked sources (including books), having multiple very famous husbands, and being a muse at least to one (Capablanca's "I shall regain my crown for you", for example). Dmoskovich (talk) 04:24, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep The article has been improved since the recent AfD. How does it detract from notability of a writer if the main topic of her writings was her husband? (in Olga's case, one of her 4 husbands.) We have many articles about important "muses" see for example Alice Liddell, Maud Gonne and Nora Barnacle (Lewis Carroll, WB Yeats, and James Joyce respectively.) This is an interesting and informative article that our readers should be able to find. HouseOfChange (talk) 02:31, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. User:Ma[[rk the train| MT Train ]]Talk 03:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I researched this woman and greatly improved the article with more information and citations. I wouldn't consider this person a writer, though she was also notable for her writings. She was married to two very notable people, and is discussed at length in their biographies. I would consider her a socialite as her main claim to fame is in relation to her husbands. That being said, a lot has been written about her. Current sourcing of the article now satisfies WP:GNG. WP:INHERITED states that someone doesn't automatically get an entry for being related to someone famous but "Individuals in close, personal relationships with famous people (including politicians) can have an independent article even if they are known solely for such a relationship, but only if they pass WP:GNG." And that is the case here. Lonehexagon (talk) 04:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep the subject is dead so there are no promotional issues. Most subjects that continue to be noticed years after death are kept at AFD. Reliable sources discuss her. Legacypac (talk) 18:36, 27 April 2018 (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.