Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Benedict Cushing (2nd nomination)

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. Courcelles (talk) 01:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mary Benedict Cushing

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

Notable for being a wife of a redlinked person, a relative of notable persons and a "socialite." Appears to fail WP:BIO. Edison (talk) 21:34, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete—doesn't seem to meet WP:ANYBIO, and none of the more specific sets of criteria seem to apply. ╟─Treasury Tag►person of reasonable firmness─╢ 21:51, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails WP:BIO; nothing can prove the notability of the article. —MC10 (T•C•GB•L) 22:34, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article was apparently based on the free portion of the NYT article. Since I have the full text available, (and most people should also, through most public or school libraries) I have added material to the article to show the notability .She was a trustee of many NY institutions,wife to two very well known men, and apparently a major figure in NY Society. I'm adding some additional refs now. The NYT may have given full obits to relatively minor NY society people in its earliest years, but not in the 1980s. Our principle remains that anyone with a full obit there is notable, but she would be anyway. DGG ( talk ) 23:17, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
CommentIs that "our" principle, shown by consensus at most AFDs or by a guideline? Is there a link or links to help demonstrate that? I do not recall that having a "full obituary" in any particular newspaper or magazine has been sufficient to satisfy notability. She is known for marrying well, and is mentioned in the articles about those she married. Nice job finding and adding refs, but it still seems to fall a bit short. Edison (talk) 14:26, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She seems to have been an important person and the NYT is, of course, a good source. No reason to delete her article, although I don't think many readers would find it interesting unless they knew her. Kitfoxxe (talk) 23:26, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Could've just kept the old AFDs open if someone was just going to renominate them all again the same day. Anyway, I'll copy my post from there, since nothing changed in that short period of time Dream Focus 06:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Google news search shows the Los Angeles Times mentioning her as "Mary Benedict Cushing, one of the three famous Cushing sisters from Boston." Well, if a major newspaper says she's famous, then she's famous. Google book search shows a lot of hits about her, and not just because of her famous father. Dream Focus 14:37, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Evan after the rewrite by DGG, there doesn't seem to be much here. She appears to be a socialite who served on some boards. Most socialites do. AniMate 19:59, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and further expand. Even the New York Times source in the article called her a "leader in Arts". Sad that in death one's notability comes to the fore.[1][2] Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:01, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep mentioned in NYT + other indep sources, and links to others span across several other people, hence can't be placed in a parent article. Ours is not to judge why socialites are notable :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Not just dinner-parties, but notable Trustee positions. Johnbod (talk) 23:23, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She seems notable enough for NYT coverage. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:47, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sufficient sources to indicate notability. Edward321 (talk) 01:39, 5 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: notability is met by sources. Even the nom says she's notable, but apparently doesn't like that socialites can be notable.--Milowent (talk) 01:47, 5 June 2010 (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.