Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malia Obama

Add links
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 was Speedy Delete. Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline requires significant coverage of the individual. The coverage of Malia, as has been brought up in the discussion, has been trivial. Also, as per Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Notability is inherited, notability is not inherited, and as any coverage of Malia is currently only as a result of the coverage of her father, there is no assertion of notability. Should significant coverage of Malia be found in the future, there is no prejudice against recreating a suitable article. -- Avi (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Malia Obama[edit]

Malia Obama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Children of American Politicians (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

This is the result of a challenged prod.[1][2] Malia Obama is the 9-year-old daughter of U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama and as such has been mentioned trivially in reliable sources and the mentions have always been made in connection with her very notable father. Since mentions of her in these reliable sources has been trivial WP:BIO's basic criteria for notability and the primary argument seems to be that WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS and that she is notable because her father is notable. Neither of which, of course, are valid reasons to use to keep or delete an article. Bobblehead (rants) 20:27, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding Children of American Politicians, as it was created as a content fork to avoid deletion of the content in the original article. Grsztalk 23:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Also adding children of candidates and a grandson. Cate Edwards, Wade Edwards, David Eisenhower, Vanessa Kerry. Michelle Obama added but may be re-created after she becomes First Lady. Watchingobama (talk) 23:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
See diff. for context. - Ev (talk) 00:48, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, now you're just disrupting Wikipedia in order to make a point. You know very well that there is a huge difference between Michelle Obama who actively campaigns around the coutry and regularly appears in the media and her daughter Malia who is out of the public eye. Do not, as you did, add AfD templates that point back here to articles unrelated to this discussion simply because you don't like the way this discussion is going. --Loonymonkey (talk) 00:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've thought of it and wife Obama qualifies as an article. However, the other kids of politicians equally qualify or disqualify. So, like Grz, I am adding the names of the kids, but not Michelle Obama. Wade Edwards does not deserve special inclusion because he is dead because we routinely delete articles written about 9/11 victims. What I am doing is not making a point but developing specific criteria. So everyone get's treated the same, black and white, boy and girl, same articles kept, same article deleted. Watchingobama (talk) 14:58, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then nominate those articles for deletion individually, but leave it out of this process. They have nothing to do with this article or this discussion. Adding AFD tags to those articles that point back here is simply being disruptive. Accept that there is no support or consensus for keeping this article and move on. If you want to continue your crusade in separate discussions, have at it. --Loonymonkey (talk) 15:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete - non-notable, for sure. Grsztalk 20:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'd support a redirect to her father's article as well though. Just being the daughter of a notable person doesn't necessarily make you notable yourself. Also this article is so full of fluff (she Likes Hannah Montana and Beyonce, and won't stay at a Hilton to protest Paris Hilton?) I could stuff a pillow with it. Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I can fix that Watchingobama (talk) 20:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Presidential relatives are the exception. See many previous discussions. Watchingobama (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Where? Tnxman307 (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What current or former President is she related to? Even if she was, you'd have to point out those previous discussions, since I can find no policy or guideline that states this. — Gwalla | Talk 22:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Redirect to Barack Obama. If Malia's father becomes President, there will probably be enough fluff pieces focusing specifically on her in reliable sources to justify an article, but right now she's just a 9-year-old girl. Give her a few more months of privacy at least, per WP:BASICHUMANDECENCY. Oh, sorry — that guideline doesn't exist. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There is no minimum age to have a Wikipedia article written about you. Watchingobama (talk) 20:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Strong keep -
    1. notable very, very close relative of one of the most written about politicians in the U.S. today.
    2. Many, many other articles of presidential candidates' kids like Wade Edwards, Cate Edwards, Barbara Bush (daughter).
    3. Several sources/article about the kid, not the father. These appeared in USA Today, People, New York Daily News, etc.
    4. Notable information such as opposition to Hilton Corp. This is not just a stub saying "Malia is daughter of Barack, end of stub"
    5. Bobblehead, Tvoz, and Scjessey have been blanking out so they should be counted as one vote.
    6. Cate Edwards is not Crap so WP:othercrapexist does not apply.
    7. Article hasn't been given a chance to be expanded.
    8. Others have added information, templates, infoboxes, references, not just me. Malia is not an obscure school or rock band, she is one of the few senator's daughters that is featured in the news.
    9. Also note that there is no minimum age that people must be for them to be included in Wikipedia. You don't have to be an adult to have a Wikipedia article. We are not showing a naked Malia or revealing her social security number. Watchingobama (talk) 20:39, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Comment. 1. No she's not, 2. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, 3. Trivial coverage only, 4. see #1, 5. WP:AGF, 6. see #2, 7. Doesn't need it...it won't, 8. No they haven't, yes she is. 9. Has nothing to do with anything. Grsztalk 20:44, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sweet mother of pearl, man.. I have not blanked anything. I've made three edits on the article. The first to {{prod}} it,[3] the second to remove two references for an unbelievably trivial comment Barack made about his daughter not wanting to patronize Hilton hotels because of Paris Hilton,[4] and the third edit to tag this article for AFD.[5] As for the rest, see Grsz11's response. --Bobblehead (rants) 20:53, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete both Unlike Meghan McCain, all the references to her are pretty much trivial. Probably will get more notice if Obama wins the nomination or presidency, but not notable now. --Bfigura (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
People magazine is not trivial, unlike the National Enquirer. Also featured in major newspapers and national newspapers, like USA Today and the New York Times. Why not help write it, not criticize it? Watchingobama (talk) 20:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Becuase all that is being report is that she likes Beyonce and doesn't like Paris Hilton. There's no other notability there, all the articles written supposedly about her are just fluff pieces about the campaign. Where does she have any other notability other than the fact her dad may be the Democratic nominee for president? Wildthing61476 (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
(E/C) I think you misunderstand my meaning. I'm not arguing that the Enquirer is trivial. Rather, I'm saying the coverage was trivial. I.e., it was not an in-depth article about her. It seems like each article has a few lines about her, which is the definition of trivial coverage. Best, --Bfigura (talk) 20:46, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notability is not inherited. Just because pops is famous does not make her so. Hannah Montana notwithstanding. I'd say redirect to Barack Obama. Mahalo. --Ali'i 20:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete per Wildthing61476 and Ali'i. I'd be OK with a redirect to Barack.  Frank  |  talk  20:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not only lack of notability, but also I think it's not really appropriate to target a 9-year-old child with an article. Maybe an article if she becomes a White House resident (Amy Carter and Chelsea Clinton probably would have gotten articles at the time if WP had existed in 1977 and 1993) but not until then. Wasted Time R (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per Josiah Rowe; privacy for nine year old child and WP:BASICHUMANDECENCY. (Why is there no essay on that...?)-PetraSchelm (talk) 20:54, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Not applicable. Mother gave interview and revealed info. So no privacy concerns exists. Watchingobama (talk) 21:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
See my comments to Josiah about that. ;-) --Ali'i 20:59, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • redirect to main article on Obama. More reasonably covered in the article about her father. JoshuaZ (talk) 20:58, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Will try, but guaranteed it will be deleted. Article is too long (Mr. Obama) so Malia stuff is guaranteed to be removed. I'll quote you.Watchingobama (talk) 21:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Delete This child is not notable in her own right. The sources are all, essentially, trivial mentions of her - they're really talking about her Dad. After deletion, a redirect is fine. ETA: and it's a coatrack - check the state of the article after this diff - that's after the author and before anyone else edited. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 21:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete. Not notable in own right. The article is simply minor trivia. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 21:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Breaking news - The end result of merge/redirect will be information will be lost and deleted. Proof, I added parts (not the whole article) into Barack Obama and it was removed in seconds. Therefore, we MUST keep Malia Obama or some information will be lost. For those who like censorship, merge/redirect can be a ploy to get rid of information they don't like. That's not accusing all merge/redirect supporters of censorship, just that this is the end result. So KEEP and improve. Watchingobama (talk) 21:18, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Comment You guessed it: Wikipedia infact, is a vast right-wing conspiracy. Grsztalk 21:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That's sarcasm, right?  Frank  |  talk  21:21, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What information, the fact she likes Hannah Montana? Again everything in this article is trivial and can be mentioned in the article about her father. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why would her being a fan of Hannah Montana be mentioned in her father's article? Even if there were enough non-trivial coverage about Malia to create an article about her, I doubt her liking Hannah Montana would be included. --Bobblehead (rants) 21:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That's my point actually, there's nothing here for an article, and yeah I know that HM stuff wouldn't go into her dad's article. Wildthing61476 (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why would it go in any article? It's important to no one besides Miss Obama herself (and Miley Cyrus's accountant, to a small extent). — Gwalla | Talk 22:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Try putting any of Malia's info in the Barack article and it will be deleted pronto. Malia is a kid, I know. Abuse her and attack her in an article, no. But famous children do have articles. Think it's trivial, improve it. There are so many google references, some with good information. Watchingobama (talk) 21:28, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • Speedy Delete: For the purposes of wikipedia, she is no more notable than Barack Obama's coffee mug which is also frequently mentioned by reliable sources. She is a biographical detail in his life, not a notable figure on her own. I would also support the redirect option. --Loonymonkey (talk) 21:41, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • NEW INFORMATION
    See Cate Edwards AFD. Same facts. Some claim she is not notable and wanted the article deleted. It stayed. Fight race discrimination. If you keep Cate Edwards, you must keep Malia Obama. Watchingobama (talk) 21:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC) — Watchingobama (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Comment - this nonsense has already been covered by linking to Wikipedia:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Note: I am not making a comment on the suitability of the other article, just pointing out that it has nothing to do with this AfD.  Frank  |  talk  21:36, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nonsense indeed. There's a significant difference between a 26-year-old woman who has actively campaigned for her father and a 9-year-old girl who is presumably focused on spelling tests. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:50, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Merely being the daughter of a famous politician does not give one sufficient notability. --ElKevbo (talk) 21:43, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Completely and utterly devoid of any notability, save for being the daughter of a presidential candidate. Since notability is not contagious, I've half a mind to just speedy this as CSD A7 (non-notable biography), but maybe it's worth letting this farce play out. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:57, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the only thing notable is her father. She can be covered on his page. Redirect GtstrickyTalk or C 22:00, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unless this particular 9 year old girl does something outrageous/outstanding/outspoken to warrant her own article. No evidence of this happening. Delete. As far as "search terms" go, I would be against a redirect also, as it is highly unlikely that some reader, looking for info on Barack, actually types the name of a 9 year old girl instead. Delete, no redirect. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and redirect to Barack Obama. Could become notable in future as a first daughter. --Dhartung | Talk 22:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep quite sufficient notability already. DGG (talk) 22:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Just being related to somebody famous, no matter how closely, does not make one notable. Unless and until she does something important on her own other than include half of a Presidential candidate's DNA, she doesn't get an article. — Gwalla | Talk 22:33, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now. If her dad becomes president, then she may well become more notable, but for now, notability is not inherited. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:35, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and redirect; if someone is looking for an article on this, it's important to have the redirect, which points them to all the information we have on the subject which would be in her father's article. Otherwise, she's just not notable in and of herself. Perhaps if Obama becomes president, she'll have enough notability, but today it's just tabloid news.--Prosfilaes (talk) 22:37, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to the article on her father. He's of course plenty notable. There's not that much to be said about her at this point though, and what there is is directly related to their relationship. Aleta Sing 23:07, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect, without merging, to Barack Obama. Somebody apparently noticed there was no page on young Miss Obama and decided to inflate the "Articles I Have Created" portion of their user page. Pop Secret (talk) 23:38, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Relist seperately. Some are undoubtedly notable, like David Eisenhower (wonder where Camp David's name came from) and Michelle Obama, though I'm not sure about the rest. Editorofthewikireview my edits here! 00:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete for all the reasons above. Give the kid a break! Bellagio99 (talk) 00:31, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete As per previous comments regarding the conspicuous lack of individual notability Ecoleetage (talk) 01:34, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Malia Obama and then redirect to Barack Obama#Personal life per nom. Media coverage of Malia herself has been minimal; she is only notable in relation to her father and substantially all the coverage of her opinions, etc. has come not directly from her, but from interviews with her parents. The article does not even report the sourced information correctly. For example, the article states, In 2004, Malia publicly questioned her father as to why he was not running for vice-president. "Shouldn't you be the vice president first?" But the incident took place in 2005, not 2004; she didn't "publicly question" her father but rather was overheard by a television camera crew while talking to her father; and she didn't ask "why he was not running for vice-president". What the source actually says is: "Are you going to try to be president?" Malia Obama asked her father, giggling as a television camera captured the moment. "Shouldn't you be the vice president first?" There's no real substance here. Also, delete Children of American Politicians entirely as it is just a big mess. David Eisenhower is not the child of a politician since neither of his parents actually sought elective office. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:00, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to her father. She is nine. She can't even be anywhere without her parents. Most of the other children of politicans mentioned are at the age of majority and have done things on their own in life. Frankly, it would be better if she didn't have an article; nothing really good can come from it and that will be a serious article to watch. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 03:46, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete of both. (1)I strongly object to the Malia Obama article as the editor who changed it today wanted it to read (see here). I particularly point out the section titled "Political positions of Malia Obama", the nine year old child. Further, even after the ridiculous excesses regarding Hannah Montana, Paris Hilton, asthma, etc, are removed, I believe this article should be deleted, as the subject has absolutely no notability beyond being the young child of a candidate in an election. I don't object to returning to a redirect to her father as had been there untouched until today since 2005 for anyone who might come here and search on her name, although I think it is not particularly necessary to have even a redirect. (2)The second article is nothing more than a copy of what the editor wanted in the first article, and was set up as a conglomeration of several other articles about individuals who do have some notability on their own, apparently set up to make a point, not because it was valid. Tvoz/talk 04:11, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per official policy on biographies of living people. As a minor, it is especially important for us to adhere strictly to the official BLP policy. DrKiernan (talk) 07:02, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wrong information Thank you DrKiernan for your seemingly wise advice. Your advice is incorrect. Your reference link makes no distinction of age. IF Wikipedia policy states "Articles about children are prohibited" then I will abide by such rule. However, there is NO SUCH rule. All of the politician's children listed in this AFD are equally notable/non-notable. Note that I did not include John Kerry's other daughter as she is a filmmaker who made a famous film. Watchingobama (talk) 15:03, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You have misread my comments. People notable only for a single event, i.e. the identity of their father, should not have their own articles, they should be mentioned in their father's article only. The policy makes no age distinction but I do. Minors deserve greater protection and privacy than is accorded to adults. The others listed are not minors (and in one case not living). DrKiernan (talk) 15:23, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - can't we close this (with immediate delete) per WP:SNOW?  Frank  |  talk  15:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Any admin who hasn't contributed could do so. I'd be happy to see that. Certainly the disruption from Watchingobama needs to stop. On the other hand, the discussion hasn't been running for that long. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 15:20, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You should try to call what you disagree with as disruption. We should treat all kids equally, Black and White. I don't want to change Wikipedia rules, just that we should delete all kids or none of the kids. The kids listed are equally famous or not famous. Those that are much more famous are NOT listed! I can go along with all the kids deleted or none of the kids deleted. Watchingobama (talk) 15:25, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Except Malia is 9 (a child)...the others are adults. Grsztalk 15:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
there are probably a number of good wikipedians who will want to have a voice here. It's worth running the full time. DGG (talk) 15:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to closing admin The majority of comments at this AfD have been made in relation to Malia Obama only, and not to any other articles that may have been listed in the meanwhile. SHEFFIELDSTEELTALK 15:26, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this non-notable bio, and the end-run WP:FORK that's been nominated with it. (And before any accusations are hurled, I want to point out that I'm running as an Obama supporter for delegate to the 2008 Democratic National Convention. I like her daddy; but she's non-notable, period.) --Orange Mike | Talk 15:28, 2 May 2008 (UTC) (4th Wis. Congressional District)[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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Malia_Obama&oldid=1140245596"