Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matilda Amissah-Arthur

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. Arguments that provide evidence that the subject is notable carry more weight than those that argue that her status doesn't necessarily make her notable, and consensus has formed that the GNG is met. Michig (talk) 06:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Matilda Amissah-Arthur

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

Spouse of a president or other head of state is usually notable -- but she's the spouse of vice present. The refs are not substantial. DGG ( talk ) 01:47, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:51, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:52, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Second ladies are potentially also notable (we do, frex, have articles about Tipper Gore and Lynne Cheney and Jill Biden), but the sourcing here isn't good at all. First and second ladies do still have to pass WP:GNG, and are not entitled to unsourced or primary sourced articles just because they exist — it's accepted as a claim of notability if it's properly sourced, but is not a claim of notability that confers an exemption from having to source it properly. Delete (or draftify?) without prejudice against recreation if somebody can source it better than this. Bearcat (talk) 19:45, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as such given there's nothing for convincing independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 16:55, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete being the spouse of some notable figure isn't the pass here. Or is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slu tsu (talk • contribs) 18:50, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The spouse of the vice president of a country has enough formal and informal duties to make them notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:52, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 04:20, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are plenty of sources that cover this person primarily and in-depth (such as 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) and this person definitely passes WP:GNG. Sure, being married or related to someone that is notable, in itself, does not establish notability for that person automatically. However, this article subject clearly has significant references and coverage to establish notability. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:52, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Dane2007 ^talk 02:23, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not only is she in the news as a 2nd Lady enough to pass GNG, but she's just been installed as a queen mother of the Logba-Adzakoe [1]. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 19:52, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Multiple duties and grounds for notability, adequate sources. GNG met. Montanabw^(talk) 16:10, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per WP:GNG. Article needs expansion, not deletion per WP:ATD. Hmlarson (talk) 19:58, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – The subject meets WP:BASIC per a review of available sources. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 20:03, 21 August 2016 (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.