Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silda Wall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 of the debate was delete. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Silda Wall

Non-notable: a lawyer whose only claim to fame seems to be that her husband is a relatively obscure, if notable, politician mgekelly 04:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Oppose. I vote against deletion. Besides the fact I created most of the content in this article, the fact is that both Silda Wall and Eliot Spitzer are well-known among lawyers and politicians throughout the United States. Spitzer is quite prominent as the most aggressive attorney general today in America---he's a classic example of a lawyer using the AG job to get into the governor's office. Wall is prominent as a highly successful attorney who put aside her career to focus on raising their family and supporting her husband's career. --Coolcaesar 05:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep - Being the wife of Eliot Spitzer makes a person notable enough for me. - Richardcavell 05:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep or Merge with Eliot Spitzer -- Spitzer is fairly well-known across the United States. Wall is frequently mentioned in articles about Spitzer's campaign (e.g. [1]). - Anirvan 06:41, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
OK, well obviously I didn't realise how important the husband is. But I still don't see what is notable about his wife. I think the logic that being married to someone very notable makes you notable by default is wrong. If there is interesting information about her personally, I'd reconsider, but it seems to me that giving up her career to raise children and support her husband is unexceptional. mgekelly 07:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete because Wall is prominent as a highly successful attorney who put aside her career to focus on raising their family and supporting her husband's career, i.e. she isn't prominent. Vizjim 09:04, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete- being married to a famous person does not automatically bestow notability. And does not in this case. Reyk YO! 09:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - the Children for Children Foundation website does not mention her in their [foundation page] so she seems to be just one of the parents involved in it's foundation. The org seems notable but Silda seems not. Peripitus 09:17, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Reyk. DarthVader 10:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. See "Mrs. Spitzer Suits Up: Attorney Silda Wall Never Counted On Becoming—Eccch!—a Candidate’s Wife" from New York Observer May 1, 2006. --Nelson Ricardo 10:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete – possibly merge with Eliot Spitzer, not sufficiently notable to warrant her own article – Gurch 11:36, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Mgekelly and Vizjim. Paddles 12:43, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into Spitzer's article and redirect. She's not notable enough to have her own page, and that foundation not listing her doesn't help her case. -- Kicking222 13:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Not notable with less than 900 hits.--Jusjih 13:54, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Spitzer is famous within the United States, and has been heard of by those of us blessedly outside. His wife probably doesn't need her own article, but there's no reason why it couldn't be merged in with his. We delete information because it doesn't belong, not just for the heck of it. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge I'm a Spitzer fan, I live in NJ and I've never heard of her. She isn't notable enough as a famous wife and she isn't notable enough as a lawyer or activist. jbolden1517Talk 15:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Let's take this to its logical conclusion; suppose Spitzer wins the NY gubernatorial race? Well, as it happens, the wife of Massachusetts' governor doesn't have an article. Neither does the spouse of Vermont's governor. Jon Corzine had a very messy, public divorce, and his ex- doesn't have an article. Jodi Rell's husband isn't even named in her article, never mind have one of his own. Ed Rendell's wife is the only one of any nearby state governor's to have an article, and at least she's been a Federal judge on the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals for the last decade. If governors' spouses aren't notable by definition, a state attorney-general's spouse sure as hell isn't. What is the basis for assuming that Wall is either "prominent" or "highly successful?" That she worked for a giant law firm once? RGTraynor 15:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per Kicking222. Crazynas 17:12, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. Only notable in that she's married to someone notable. -- stubblyhead | T/c 18:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - As long as there is verifiable information about her then she should be kept (unless you can argue that she will not be taking a major part in his attempt to be elected). Another reason why notability is subjective, POV, and should not be used as a criteria for inclusion in or deletion from Wikipedia. DanielZimmerman 19:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - In other words, you believe that everyone should have an article, as long as the information within is factual? RGTraynor 19:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Private person, does not need article, does not meet WP:BIO -- Malber (talk • contribs) 20:13, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete only tie to "notability" is being the wife of Spitzer, not notable herself.--Jersey Devil 00:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per Reyk, or as a second choice merge and redirect to Eliot Spitzer. --Metropolitan90 04:02, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NN. Author can mention Spitzer's wife in his bio. ---CH 08:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete nn.  Grue  14:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete--Peta 05:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, non-notable person. RexNL 22:54, 22 May 2006 (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.