Contents

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sir Charles Stronge, 7th Baronet

Sir Charles Stronge, 7th Baronet[edit]

Sir Charles Stronge, 7th Baronet (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

No events of notability shown - existing and getting married does not pass WP:BIO possible redirect to Stronge Baronets. Vintagekits 14:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - JP, Deputy Lieutenant, High Sheriff and Baronet. Part of a series of articles, which it adds to.--Counter-revolutionary 22:36, 13 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep- all Baronets are automatically notable Astrotrain 07:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, According to a member of the Arbitration Committee and the Peerage Project The presumption of notability for peers has never rested on them being peers in itself, but rather on the fact that up until 1999 most hereditary peerages earned you a seat in a national legislature, and members of national legislatures are presumed notable. Baronets have no such claim, and individual baronets must attempt to meet WP:BIO as individuals], so baronets are not automatically notable. --Vintagekits 12:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 09:27, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect - JPs and DLs are not automatically notable - Otherwise, this fella has done zip. Titles do not confer notability, unless awarded to that person - Tiswas^(t) 16:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...and it says that where exactly? --Counter-revolutionary 16:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...and it says that they are notable where exactly? - Tiswas^(t) 17:34, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Per contra, baronets are inherently non-notable, and parasites on democracy -- SockpuppetSamuelson 09:15, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think that comment just speaks for itself! No reason actually given except a clear anti-aristocracy bias!--Counter-revolutionary 09:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - As opposed to a clear pro-aristocracy bias. AfDs are not the place for discussing whether you likeordisklike the subject, but whether the article satisfies various criteria for inclusion in wikipedia. - Tiswas^(t) 09:35, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think it needs pointed out that a user's only reasoning is based on not liking it!.--Counter-revolutionary 09:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The reason given was "baronets are inherently non-notable", albeit embellished with redundant socio-political comment. I think we've already covered likes and disklikes- Tiswas^(t) 10:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect. As per Counter.--Edtropolis 17:20, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Counter-revolutionary. JJL 17:32, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete notability is not inherited at this level; as I have explained lengthily elsewhere, being a JP is beneath a municipal or circuit judge in the US, and a deputy lieutenant is a mid-level or minor county-level official. All in all, nn. Carlossuarez46 18:30, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I have not seen a Wikipedia policy or even a guideline which achieved consensus saying that "all Baronets, JPs, Deputy Lieutenants, or High Sheriffs are inherently notable on the basis of receiving or inheriting a title." Per WP:NOT Wikipedia is not a genealogical site or a mirror site for a directory of people with listings in a peerage book. Where are reliable and independent sources with more than directory listings? Edison 19:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - unless this guy actually did something (rather than just inherited a title) I don't think he should be considered notable. If this is part of a "series" of articles I suggest a suitable redirect/merge. michaelCurtis ^talk+ _{contributions} 21:28, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/Redirect This was really unnecessary as it has already been determined in numerous afds now that Peers, Baronets or any other type of noble who have very little notability except their title should be redirected to the relevant page for that title. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 02:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Nothing of value or interest here - non-notable redirect to Stronge Baronets Giano 11:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per Counter-Revolutionary. He was several things besides just a Baronet. Edward321 01:52, 18 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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.