Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine Masters (2nd nomination)
to an appropriate longevity list.  is not at all equivalent to . Perhaps reading them both would help to understand why. Distinguishing between the two ought not be difficult. This is definitely a  situation. Nothing encyclopedic appears in any of the sources.  The apology for five identical birthday cards from Prince William is cute, but hardly justifies a stand-alone bio. Deleting the article and then redirecting to an appropriate list serves the subject adequately and follows our |general notability guideline (there ain't none here) and our reqirement of  in multiple, independent |reliable sources. The only sources here fit into the exception codified by  and 
— User:David, 18:43, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOPAGE||WP:IDONTLIKEIT||WP:NOPAGE||WP:GNG||WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:ROUTINE||WP:PERMASTUB (Wikipedia:Notability)