Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Susy Clemens

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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Susy Clemens

The daughter of Mark Twain didn't live long enough to do anything notable enough for a separate article. Notability is not inherited. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:02, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:

Keep Both articles appear well-sourced and the first is also a biographer of Samuel Clemens. Worst case these articles should be merged to Samuel Clemens, not deleted. Edward321 (talk) 14:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why this article can't stay. There are thousands of articles on Wikipedia, some much worse and less significant that this. It was a touching story. So she didn't live that long, but she lived, and deserves to be remembered. Aggiebean (talk) 15:28, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Of course she was notable as the daughter of Mark Twain. A biography she wrote of her father was also published about 15 years ago, as noted in the article. I went out of my way to source it line by line. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 17:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 17:21, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep both I've always felt that close relatives of major historical figures should get their own articles as long as there is enough to say about them. Those relatives may not have done anything particularly important, but if historians have written about their lives, we might as well include that information. Pretty much all the articles I've seen about the parents/siblings/children of US presidents are kept when they come to AFD, so it's clear that NOTINHERITED is not always followed in practice. These articles seem potentially useful to Twain researchers, and they're both fully sourced, so why not keep them around? Zagalejo^^^ 19:56, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep separately notable as a major role in the life and works of the author. Her early death does not make her the less significant in this respect. I agree that relatives of really major figures given extensive rreatment in works about the figures should have separate treatment. DGG (talk) 04:17, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes WP:BIO. Notability is clearly established. There are at least 2 reliable independent sources with non-trivial coverage. Age is unimportant. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 09:53, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Highly useful article, maybe she orginally gained notability b/c she's related to MT, but she clearly transcended that during her short life. NOTINHERITED should not be used too broadly with historic figures, in my opinion--while a separate article on the wife or husband of every modern celebrity might not be desirable, the potential for abuse with 19th century figures is far more remote. - Vartanza (talk) 03:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.