Deletion of Janet Gordon-Lennox, Countess of March and Kinrara

Comment: Just to close this out: I don't have a dog in this fight and the fate of this particular article is not of great interest to me. But the way  is written implies that this person is to be presumed notable. If it shouldn't, that's fine with me, but it should make it clear why, i.e. which titles are presumed notable and which aren't
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: with the obvious proviso that if any notabilty for the subject in her own right is demonstrated, then that should be considered) I would have to agree with Ironholds that the ''Honourable''title is just a courtesy title. In addition, even her husbands's title, the ''Earl of March and Kinrara'', is in itself a courtesy title. There is a tradition of the sons of senior peers using a lesser title of the father as a '''styling''', but the '''actual''' title resides with the father (in this case theCharles Gordon-Lennox, 10th Duke of Richmond|father-in-law of the subject of this article, so the subject's title is most certainly merely a courtesy styling. (See Courtesy titles in the United Kingdom and a specific mention of the title in List of courtesy titles in the Peerages of the British Isles.) Returning to the subject of this article, it would need to be established that the subject is the subject of coverage in her own right to establish notabilty, either in a particular field or |general notability. Apart from a few trivial mentions,  not from reliable sources, that say she attended events connected  with the Goodwood Estate, I can't find any coverage, although others might be more successful in finding it
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)