Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dannielynn Marshall Stern
I suspect the "spread of titillating claims about people's lives" has already been achieved by the substantial media coverage on this issue, which means Wikipedia is not the "primary vehicle"; therefore this article is not in violation of  ''per se''.  doesn't specifically exclude infants, nor does it say that the sources must contain substantial coverage about "her as person"; it only says that the coverage must be "non-trivial", i.e. more than a passing mention. If the whole source - and there are six or seven separate sources cited - is about her paternity, then IMHO this counts as non-trivial coverage. As to "not mentioning the baby's name in other articles", that would count as censorship of established information, which would be in violation of 
— User:Walton_monarchist89, 20:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BLP||WP:BIO||WP:NOT (Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons)