Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sue Jones

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. --Tony Sidaway Talk 07:45, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

Sue Jones
Delete mother of famous people do not get to upwardly-derive notability. They need to be notable themselves. -Splash 01:38, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. See, I wouldn't have even VfD'ed this, I would have made it a redirect. -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:44, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I mean, a little bit of merge wouldn't hurt with that delete, but I agree with Antaeus Feldspar as well. Sirmob 04:06, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Ummm...which of the three ways are you voting? -Splash 04:58, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, even the article gives me no indication that anyone would actually look up Sue on her own. Dcarrano 04:38, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, she seems to be related in someway to two different famous people, so someone doing research on either one can look her up -- 's four edits are all to the article, this VfD, or Norah Jones.
 * Merge any notable information into Norah Jones, but only because Norah's father is notable. Cnwb 07:42, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, My take is different. I think it is worthwhile to keep since any story on Norah Jones seems to refer to Sue Jones, especially her methods of imparting musicall awareness to Norah at a young age. If we keep it, may be someone else may add more details on that which can be useful to other parents. If you merge, you lose that wonderful possibility. ssinger 07:51, July 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * This users 3 edits are all to this VfD.-Splash 13:31, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep if cleaned up. Some notability. JamesBurns 10:04, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep having articles like this saves space in the other articles, so they don't have to be clogged with biographical information about parents and siblings and the like. --malathion talk 14:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Are we short in space in the Norah Jones article? More importantly, a separate article about a topic implies its seperate encyclopedic note: "making space" doesn't really have any bearing seeing as WP:NOT paper, and all. -Splash 18:15, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with Norah Jones article. Jones' mother is not notable. Nandesuka 18:08, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep with some formatting changes. To me notability criterion is met, notable because of contribution but may not be in the public eye. A bit of parallel I see is Venus and Serena Williams' father in the Women's tennis world. He is a bit more in the public eye because of media exposure but the real story is how he coached them in an unconventional way.   18:24, 18 July 2005 (UTC) -- this vote is one of 's two edits so far.
 * Smerge and redirect  to Norah Jones. I don't like the "notability chain rule", as it's neverending. Are we going to include everyone's mom/dad/sister/etc? Besides, this is full of unencyclopedic stuff like she's "described as a kind and helpful person", "On the gossip front...". She'd like Norah to record some standards. Good for her, now why's that here? -R. fiend 19:50, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, I don't like the idea of a redirect. Redirecting people to people can easily be problematical. Since I doubt anyone who doesn't already know Sue is Norah's mother will search for this, I'm going to vote to smerge and delete (and quite a slight smerge at that). -R. fiend 18:29, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * If we smerge, we can't delete, I thought? GFDL and all...-Splash 13:57, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * There's a way to do it while preserving the history; though I forget what it is. If it's too much trouble then I'll vote delete. If someone wants to add some of the information back in their own words, I imagine they can do it without violating GFDL and all. I mean, the original contributor just took something he/she read and rephrased it presumably anyway. -R. fiend 14:40, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge. I take issue with those arguing notability criteria is passed (see Criteria for inclusion of biographies). These facts should be merged into Norah Jones (where they will have merit, they are important to understand the artist's development).
 * Delete not notable on her own. Merge anything worth keeping into her daughter's article. --Etacar11 23:51, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Smerge and Delete per Rfiend. Xoloz 04:06, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, mabye if she had six kids as famous as Norah Jones, ala Joseph Jackson, I can't see how she meets any biography criteria otherwise.--nixie 04:12, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. An unencyclopedic, gossipy, mish-mash on an individual of absolutely no note whatsoever. Indrian 17:31, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It can use some edits to tone down the gossip and make it read better but that kind of stuff takes care of itself over time. She is not a media story like Joseph Jackson but deserves notoriety for a similar reason, a single woman spotting and nurturing a great talent. (Unsigned vote by )
 * Keep. reasonably notable and interesting character. In  fact I want to learn more about her  8:04, 23 July 2005 (UTC) (Unsigned vote by )
 * Delete. Not interesting enough for an encyclopedic entry. Nothing notable except being the mother of a famous person. Maybe a line mentioning that Norah was inspired by her mother's love of Billie Holiday can be included in Norah Jones --Fitful 21:19, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't understand why the big opposition to keeping it. It is probably in the grey area but let us err on the side of keeping it. The content definitely needs improvement. - occasional visitor 06:13, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep with edits to the content. In the few minutes I thought about it, I went back andd forth a bit but eventually decided to vote to keep. My hope is the community will beef up the content over time shedding more light on the mother's influence on the talent. I learnt about Joseph Jackson after seeing it mentioned here and it was informative. So someone else might find information about this parent useful. Jim Pulaski 04:14, 1 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.