Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jean Wills

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 delete. Daniel (talk) 01:47, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Wills

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is one of the oldest cases I have seen of running afoul of the not news guidelines. The entire coverage is from the local paper over two months in 1952, and baiscally deals with a divorce proceeding that was abandoned. This is not the level of coverage we would need to show someone is notable, and we have elsewhere agreed that the titles she won a few years before that that we lack even direct coverage of are not in and of themselves enough to show notability. John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:06, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is no reason at all to think the 1992 book is by the same person, and pretty much everything else that shows up in searches seems to be false positives, many of them even where "wills" is a verb just after "Jean" and not part of a name.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:08, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Only claim to notability is as winner of a local beauty pageant (Southern California) and some police blotter news stories. The children's author of the same name appears to be British. pburka (talk) 17:04, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Only one source, not enough to establish notability, and it doesn't look like other sources exist. casualdejekyll (talk) 17:40, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Newspaper coverage for getting arrested (but not convicted) in a family dispute is nowhere near enough to establish notability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Stale news clipping. What an odd relic! KidAd • SPEAK 22:12, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Patently obviously non-notable. Gildir (talk) 22:47, 4 August 2021 (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.