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. Merging can be discussed through the usual process. Chick Bowen 04:14, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mildred Gale (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Delete Not notable per WP:BIO. Notability is not inherited. In this case, notability is not reverse inherited. Ave Caesar (talk) 12:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Just because someone may not be notable by association, does not mean they are not notable themselves. This is an uncontroversial, historical, encyclopedic subject of interest to our readers, about which Google Books turns up sufficient material to write a decent, verifiable, non-stub article. Nominator shows no evidence of having done due diligence prior to resorting to deletion. Skomorokh 12:14, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep for historic value.--Paul McDonald (talk) 12:29, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and/or redirect somewhere. Information is of historical value but, the subject doesn't have enough notability (if any) for a stand alone article. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Google hits are nice, but does anyone know of specific books that discuss her life in detail? Since I looked at the article last time [1], a year ago, no sources have been added. --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:56, 31 July 2008 (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.