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 no consensus. No consensus to merge either...potential merge discussion should take place at article talk page(s). Daniel (talk) 00:26, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Judy Nelson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

(1st XfD) The article has never been more than a stub (over a decade), Notability seems to be a bad breakup and two books. Part of Wikipedia:Shortpages? (3 sentences?) Only references are her own books. Creating author seems to have had most articles deleted. Mjquinn_id (talk) 22:26, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect to Martina Navratilova#Sexuality and relationships per WP:BLP1E.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:32, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:54, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The notable person here is Navratilova. Nelson herself doesn’t meet WP: Noteworthy or WP:BLP standards and her page is overdue for deletion, in my opinion. Go4thProsper (talk) 08:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Her books have been reviewed, in the Baltimore Sun,Publishers Weekly (according to amazon.ca), the Seattle Times, the Chicago Tribune, so WP:NAUTHOR is satisfied, plus the relationship is so well-known and LGBT-noteworthy, she transcends being just noted in Navratilova's article. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:36, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand, per WP:BASIC and WP:AUTHOR, e.g. context: "...this was the Eighties and uneasy commentators would only ever venture that Nelson was Navratilova's 'friend'. After eight years together the couple split in 1991." etc., (Guardian, 2006, also noting the palimony lawsuit and books), (Guardian 2021, more than a trivial mention with biographical information), in-depth coverage of her: (Washington Post, 1993, also noting a book), additional book reviews: Publishers Weekly, SFGate. Beccaynr (talk) 13:25, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:NAUTHOR. I'm not even sure what the deletion rationale is: too short? BLP3E? NEXIST? Dislike of the page's creator? pburka (talk) 21:11, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment NOM (Augment): I originally saw it as WP:SHORT. I just tripped over an almost 20yr old 3-line stub, that told me nothing about the person. Utterly no malice WP:AGF. It didn't belong under WP:Tennis; certainly not notable there...as she is not a tennis player; therefore WP:BLP1E (there is no BLP3E?). If WP:LIT can do something with the article, then great. (Maybe WP:WPWW?) I could not find references for her other than her two books (at least about her being an "author"). I assume there is a lower book # limit? (WP:BK didn't seem to apply?) She did not seem to be linked to any pages other than Martina, Lesbian and Palimony.

+ I do not know the page creator at all...BUT, I often find when a number of articles are created by someone, then deleted...some WP:POV might be involved. Probably at least a WP:NOR issue, using her own books as reference?

= If this XFD, causes the article to become useful; then my job here is done. Mjquinn_id (talk) 13:55, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• None of those are valid deletion rationales. We don't delete stubs: we expand them. BPL1E isn't applicable: she's notable for three things (a relationship and two books). The creator is irrelevant unless you can show a COI or some sort of bad faith, and our standards for referencing were quite different in 2007. Finally, deletion is not cleanup. pburka (talk) 16:38, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Martina Navratilova. Just because there are reliable sources discussing a person, a stand-alone article isn't necessarily warranted (and certainly not obligatory). Malia Obama and Barron Trump are some noteworthy examples from recent history. While Nelson and her books received coverage in Washington Post, Baltimore Sun, Seattle Times, among many other outlets, her notability seems to stem mostly if not entirely from her relationship with Navratilova, which was the subject of her first book (and perhaps impetus for the second). Her relationship with Navratilova might thus be considered an extended single event, per WP:SINGLEEVENT and WP:BLP1E: media coverage and biographical gleanings during and subsequent to the relationship was directly related or incidental to coverage of the relationship. Unlike other partners of Navratilova like Rita Mae Brown or Nancy Lieberman, Nelson does not appear to have independent notability for anything before or afterwards. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:14, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:BLP1E states, We generally should avoid having an article on a person when each of three conditions is met: 1. If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event. Sources cover Nelson in the context of multiple events, i.e. her relationship with Navratilova, her palimony lawsuit, her life after the relationship, including her later relationship with Rita Mae Brown, and her two books. 2. If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual. Writing two books indicates she did not remain low-profile. 3. If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented. The events are significant, are mentioned in the Navratilova article, and Nelson's role in the relationship and the palimony suit are substantial and well-documented. So it appears WP:BLP1E does not support a delete/merger. Beccaynr (talk) 22:37, 15 July 2021 (UTC) There is also coverage of the palimony lawsuit that includes biographical information and detail, e.g. Orlando Sentinel, 1992, New York Times, 1992, Associated Press, 1992, and a little more on Nelson's post-relationship, post-lawsuit life: News & Record, 1992. Beccaynr (talk) 05:20, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Navratilova is also notable only for "an extended single event", i.e. her 31 year tennis career. pburka (talk) 01:27, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. Beccaynr (talk) 02:28, 16 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Additional sources have been added in the discussion. She's not known for "one event", but for several books. The fact that they both refer to one specific thing is not really that important here. /Julle (talk) 09:55, 18 July 2021 (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.