Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles McLaren, 4th Baron Aberconway (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to Baron Aberconway. (non-admin closure) buidhe 00:41, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles McLaren, 4th Baron Aberconway (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 baron seems to be rather barren of accomplishments and is not entitled to sit in the House of Lords (see List of hereditary peers removed under the House of Lords Act 1999), so WP:BIO is not satisfied. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 08:52, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. We keep all peers per consensus. See here. Until 1999 all peers were notable anyway per WP:POLITICIAN as members of a national legislature. For consistency's and common sense's sake, it makes no sense not to have articles on those few who have not sat in the Lords. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete since not all peers are no in the House of lords, there is no reason to keep articles on all of them. No actual sign that McLaren is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete For consistency's sake, we already have articles for all baronies like Baron Aberconway where this can be redirected/merged. See Wikipedia_talk:Notability_(people)#Notability_of_peers and WP:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage: "There is no consensus that nobility infers automatic notability, and a previous proposal to establish this has failed." An WP:INHERITED title that once seated one in the house of lords but no longer is therefore no longer automatic notability, exempted from the common sense of requiring significant coverage, or having accomplished something besides a wealthy lineage. Reywas92^Talk 16:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The topic has already been discussed and kept at AfD. As the nomination is mostly personal bias per WP:IDONTLIKEIT, WP:DELAFD applies, "It can be disruptive to repeatedly nominate a page in the hope of getting a different outcome." Andrew🐉(talk) 18:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  ↑ Fails to make an argument to keep the article, just as there were no arguments in the prior one that even addressed the article itself, just nonsense about automatic notability in violation of WP:SIGCOV that has not been established in guidelines. There is no ban on renomination six years later as WP:CCC. Reywas92^Talk 19:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Referring to other editors' arguments as "nonsense" usually equates to WP:IDONTLIKEIT. Consensus counts at AfD. We have a clear consensus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 22:51, 11 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Baron Aberconway. I don't rule out the possibility that sources could be found to establish the subject as notable; the previous AfD suggested that he might be notable as an art collector, but there is nothing in this article about that. If someone wants to try again with better sources to establish notability, that's fine with me. Not having an article about him would not create an inconsistency. After all, there are many other current British barons who don't have articles of their own either; see all the redlinks on Template:Current Barons of the United Kingdom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect to Baron Aberconway. The title itself is notable, the person not. DrKay (talk) 06:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge/Redirect. WP:NOPAGE applies here. He inherited in 2003 (after the November 1999 changes), and did not sit in the House of Lords.[1] Nor does his page usefully interlink some number of otherwise unrelated bluelinks. Nor is there sigcov. Inheriting a Picasso is that's been in the family for generations is literally WP:NOTINHERITED. ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 06:06, 13 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Baron Aberconway. As this person did not sit in the House of Lords, he does not meet WP:NPOL. I could find no coverage that would count towards notability, so he fails WP:GNG. Since the article contains no sourced material, a Merge is not appropriate. Devonian Wombat (talk) 01:34, 14 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:OUTCOMES. If we have a change in consensus, it has to be very clear and I'd like many more !votes, ideally in the 30 to 50 range (pardon the pun). For example when the consensus changed about the automatically notability of high schools and district superintendents. literally hundreds of Wikipedians chimed in. Bearian (talk) 18:12, 16 April 2020 (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.