Deletion of Mary Tudor pearl

Comment: and major rewrite of material needed.  As has been pointed out above, this article meets , so ''some'' of the material belongs here somewhere.  It is close to , but does not meet that deletion criteria.  The article name and overall presentation are, to say the least, misleading regarding the (lack of) certainty of this pearl's history, so renaming or merging with La Peregrina pearl could be appropriate
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:G11)

Comment: but rewrite needed.  is not a reason to delete. I'm not denying that the article skates close to |CSD G11, but I don't think a fundamental rewrite would be needed to get this to encyclopaedic standards. There has been no evidence presented that the pearl itself is not notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:UGLY||WP:G11)