Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsken Jorisdochter

In today's world, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsken Jorisdochter has become a topic of great relevance and interest to a wide public. Since its emergence, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsken Jorisdochter has captured the attention of people of all ages and backgrounds, generating a wide range of opinions and debates. Its impact is not limited to a single sector, but covers various areas, from politics to entertainment, technology and culture. In this article we will explore the impact and importance of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsken Jorisdochter in today's society, analyzing its implications and future perspectives.
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. (WP:NPASR). North America1000 02:21, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Elsken Jorisdochter (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The subject gets only brief mentions in a small number of sources. She purchased Dutch bonds that (long after her death) became the oldest ones ever traded in North America. I'm not seeing any significant coverage here. EricEnfermero (Talk) 07:07, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America1000 10:33, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 14:57, 3 November 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment -- The endurance of the bonds seems remarkable, but the person is notable only for that. If anything the article should be restructured to be about the claim in 1938, more than the 1620s purchase. Peterkingiron (talk) 11:35, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti Talk 19:41, 10 November 2015 (UTC)
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.