Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Katie Bonnar

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 redirect to

(non-admin closure) f e minist 10:14, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Katie Bonnar

)

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

Doesn't meet

WP:GNG. There are the options of redirects to Bill Bonnar or Scottish Socialist Party, but neither article contains more than her name in terms of information and so could confuse readers. Boleyn (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete as per nom, not an important enough figure in the party to redirect to
talk) 23:10, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete as per nom. I can find no online news or website sources to suggest the subject meets either general or political notability. Just this. Probably deserves no more than a brief mention in the Scottish Socialist Party article. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 00:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the

talk) 00:48, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 01:26, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Scottish Socialist Party, keeps the link blue and preserves article history if she later winds up notable. Redirects are cheap. Montanabw^(talk) 05:34, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to
primary source web page about itself — but for people with a deep interest in Scottish politics, she is a plausible enough search term that her name should lead the reader somewhere relevant rather than just redlinking. Bearcat (talk) 23:41, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Winged Blades^Godric 05:28, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I (still) support delete over a redirect. Her role in the Scottish Socialist Party was a 1-year long, patronage-style job (her father is a long-standing figure in the party) and doesn't justify a redirect.
talk) 05:57, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
]
- I think there is a judgement call here. Some of these articles, recreating a redlink is just bait for the article to be recreated and we do the drama all over again. A redirect often just creates a nice, quiet obscurity... ;-) Montanabw^(talk) 05:04, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - I removed the links from
    talk) 05:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    - Nonetheless, I'd keep it as a redirect. I really think that it is a better way to tuck in a person who is, most likely, a WP:TOOSOON situation. Daughter of a political party founder? We could have the next
      Marine LePen, (only on the other side of the political spectrum) for all we know. Montanabw^(talk) 14:59, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply
      ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:37, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Scottish Socialist Party, not notable enough for her own article. Quetzal1964 12:17, 29 May 2017 (UTC) talk

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.