Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Gibb (2nd nomination)
In today's article we will explore Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Gibb (2nd nomination), a topic that has generated interest and debate over time. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Gibb (2nd nomination) is a fundamental element in the lives of many people, and its impact extends to different aspects, from daily life to the professional field. Throughout this article, we will take an in-depth look at the different facets of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Gibb (2nd nomination), from its origins to its relevance today. In addition, we will examine the opinions of experts in the field and present concrete examples that will illustrate the importance of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Gibb (2nd nomination) in contemporary society. Get ready to immerse yourself in a fascinating journey through the world of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara Gibb (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 merge to Bee Gees as an alternative to deletion. There was certainly no consensus to keep, and there was a rough consensus that suitable sources existed to be merged and kept as a possible search term, rather than deleted outright. (non-admin closure) Etzedek24 (I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record) 18:01, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
AfDs for this article:
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Barbara Gibb (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Not notable, "just" mother of "the Bee Gees", 3 times previously deleted CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CommanderWaterford (talk) 18:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 18:55, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Being the parent of members of a musical group is not a sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:20, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Unsourced, no categories, nothing important. Oaktree b (talk) 21:13, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. A perfect example of notability not being inherited. --Kbabej (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Keep: or merge to Bee Gees per WP:GNG, coverage includes: obituaries in AP, Billboard, The Guardian, The Miami Herald, a 1600 word obit in The Times that I cannot find a link to, and many others. There is also coverage, albeit less in depth of her struggles with deaths of the family etc. such as , , and mentions in the obits of her chidren. She is also cited in books such as and , though those aren't the best sources for notability. The idea that notability shouldn't be inherited doesn't mean you can just ignore coverage such as obituaries in newspapers of record. When combined with the other sourcing, I think there's enough to indicate notability. Eddie891 Talk Work 23:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Giving birth to famous children does not convey notability. There is nothing here that cannot be covered in Bee Gees or the individual children's articles. WWGB (talk) 00:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- certainly that does not by itself, but if sufficient coverage exists GNG can still be met, which I feel is the case here. Covering her somewhere else would not mean deleting, but merging. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete. Notability is not inherited. It seems her only notability is being the mother of several successful pop singers. ExRat (talk) 00:49, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- again, NOTINHERITED is not some magic wand you can wave to remove all coverage that would go towards meeting GNG. There’s an argument to be made that the sources I presented don’t establish GNG but blindly ignoring them is not particularly helpful in determining notability. A person can absolutely inherit notability based on the coverage they have (otherwise why would we have articles on people like Nancy Lincoln?) not inherited just means that people aren’t de facto notable because of their association with notable people, which nobody is suggesting here. Eddie891 Talk Work 00:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. While I agree with you that some people become notable in their own right following the notability of a relative (see Jackie Stallone), nearly every article used as a source in this article is titled to the effect of "Barbara Gibb, Bee Gees mother"; notable almost exclusively for being the mother of The Bee Gees. ExRat (talk) 01:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- So maybe a selective merge to Bee Gees would be an appropriate compromise? I feel her role should be mentioned somewhere (obviously if we merge it wouldn't be the whole article but a sentence or two here and there). I certainly feel this isn't a clear cut case of definitely notable. Eddie891 Talk Work 03:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. I can't see any issue with having the information merged into The Bee Gees article as it provides sourced information into the background of the brothers. ExRat (talk) 06:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Once you get past "she was a singer" and "she was an early manager", there's not much else to say. WWGB (talk) 06:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Comment True, I suppose. But, some information sourced from this article could be included. ExRat (talk) 09:50, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Once you get past "she was a singer" and "she was an early manager", there's not much else to say. WWGB (talk) 06:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. I can't see any issue with having the information merged into The Bee Gees article as it provides sourced information into the background of the brothers. ExRat (talk) 06:02, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- So maybe a selective merge to Bee Gees would be an appropriate compromise? I feel her role should be mentioned somewhere (obviously if we merge it wouldn't be the whole article but a sentence or two here and there). I certainly feel this isn't a clear cut case of definitely notable. Eddie891 Talk Work 03:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Comment. While I agree with you that some people become notable in their own right following the notability of a relative (see Jackie Stallone), nearly every article used as a source in this article is titled to the effect of "Barbara Gibb, Bee Gees mother"; notable almost exclusively for being the mother of The Bee Gees. ExRat (talk) 01:10, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Delete based on provided info can't say that she meets WP:MUSICBIO and just being the mother of Bee Gees is not significant enough to have its own page. Expertwikiguy (talk) 19:41, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- Merge - to Bee Gees. It seems that the mother of three famous musicians might be a valid search term, and WP:ATD is policy. As an add on, perhaps the presence of a redirect in mainspace might deter future need to have a third AfD at some point. 174.254.194.24 (talk) 07:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- Merge to Bee Gees. Obituaries in multiple noted publications argue against outright deletion. Also, they do say she and her husband were early Bee Gees managers. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:05, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- Thought bubble. It occurred to me that maybe we can work around this issue by developing an article to be called Gibb family. There are three generations of notable members:
- Such an article would also provide for recognition of other family members like Barbara Gibb and Sammy Gibb. WWGB (talk) 12:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep. Being the mother of a celebrity doesn't make one inherently notable, but it certainly makes it likely that you'll be noticed. The unpaid obituaries in The Guardian and The Times are unambiguous evidence that these reliable sources found her life to be noteworthy, therefore she is notable. pburka (talk) 00:44, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
- Merge to Bee Gees. All the other Gibbs who have articles do so because they have been independently notable musicians in their own right, except Hugh who I'd like to merge with the parent band article. As for a family article, no - just no, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim and Mary McCartney (2nd nomination). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:42, 4 February 2021 (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.