Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tina Knowles


 * 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. Rough consensus of editors felt that the available sources evidenced notability via WP:GNG j⚛e deckertalk 02:44, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Tina Knowles

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Delete - A fashion designer who holds no notability outside of House of Deréon. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. SplashScreen (talk) 20:36, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 16:56, 6 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep, no delete, re-direct maybe. After six years and with no problems since 2007, there's no reason to go that far with this. Also, Destiny's Child are re-grouping for a new album and tour, as mentioned in their article. Tina is a vital and intrical part of the behind-the-scenes aspects of Destiny's Child. With all the other family members having their own articles, it would be doing injustice to the mother wrongly in this manner. Please give this some thought, if you would. Thanks! Best, --Discographer (talk) 15:46, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Tina Knowles is not notable simply because the rest of her family have Wikipedia articles (WP:ITSA) or because her article has been here for a long time. (WP:ARTICLEAGE). SplashScreen (talk) 18:43, 7 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Significant media coverage in news links. Notable enough for her inclusion in a "living archive" to be newsworthy 1. Over 2,000 news archive hits, which in itself is not a guarantee of notability, but shows continued coverage since 2003. It is not unusual for fashion designers who have/had a high(ish) profile beyond the label they're associated with to have their own Wikipedia page (such as Gianni and Donatella Versace). The page has been around a long time. I do question the nominator's motivations as they have a track record of AFD'ing articles linked to Destiny's Child where notability is able to be (and has been) proved and asserted as per Wikipedia's policies and criteria. Mabalu (talk) 03:46, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We do not keep articles on the basis of there being WP:LOTSOFSOURCES, we keep them on the basis that they are subject to non-trivial coverage from multiple, verifiable, reliable or independent sources. The name 'Tina Knowles' may well be mentioned in 2000+ articles but they may be a) about somebody else called Tina Knowles or b) random 'mentions-by-association' in tabloid articles, such as "Beyonce was seen shopping in New York today, accompanied by sister Solange and mother Tina". The latter is almost exclusively the case, therefore Tina has no notability outside of her famous daughters and fails WP:INHERITED. The fact that the Versaces have articles is WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS and the fact that the article has been here for a while fails WP:ARTICLEAGE. And if, through "a track record of AFD'ing articles linked to Destiny's Child" you refer to one nomination, then yes. I'm as guilty as sin. SplashScreen (talk) 09:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, a lot of her fame is because of who her daughter is, but plenty of people have famous children without being notable. She has individual notability as a successful (again, this is certainly because of who her daughter is, but that's no reason to denigrate her) fashion designer and because she has been extensively written about and at length in multiple articles which specifically focus on her beyond her brands and her role as Beyonce's Mummy (It is unrealistic to expect these never to be mentioned when talking about her), she more than passes Wikipedia notability guidelines. I note that Mathew Knowles AND BeyHive (more than "one nomination", by the way) are both being overwhelmingly demonstrated to pass WP:GNG and be keep-worthy. A glance through the Google News Results more than proves that this nomination falls in the same category. Some of the more detailed sources from the first couple of pages of results that show ongoing focus over the years on the subject beyond her brand are (along with the one mentioned earlier) 1, 2, 3. I did not see anything for "other people called Tina Knowles" and while "random mentions by association" are there (as they are for ANY famous person), there are plenty of sources which far exceed passing mentions/random namedrops. That is all I have to say about this. Mabalu (talk) 11:38, 9 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep If the only claim to notability was her relationship to her more notable family members, than I would be the first to agree this should be deleted. However, looking for references, I'm finding a number of them that refer specifically to her in depth, in reference to her work as a fashion designer and to her clothing lines.  The article could use some work, certainly, to put more focus on the information in these sources, but I see this as passing the GNG.  Rorshacma (talk) 19:51, 12 July 2012 (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.