Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duggar family


 * 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. Any remaining notable information can be merged from the history of this article.Crossmr 23:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Duggar family
While Jim Bob Duggar may be noteworthy having been a former legislator, his family is not. None of them have established any relevance of encyclopedic nature, and while such a large family is rare, it is not unique or unprecedented. I recommend the article be removed, and possibly an article on Jim Bob Duggar created instead, with a section mentioning his large family. --NEMT 21:35, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:BIO not met, per my nom. --NEMT 21:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment There has been substantial non-trivial third party coverage, as can be seen on their site. However, I have no idea how to establish the notability of a large family on Wikipedia. A friend of mine has twelve siblings, and another has eleven- however, they didn't get their own documentary. --Wafulz 22:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep They do certainly have a lot of third party coverage. They seem to be cited a lot in the Creationism/Evolution debates (that is, by the creationists). I think they are notable not because of the size of their family, but by the coverage they've (somehow) received. -- Loudsox 22:34, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Plenty of people appear as subjects on episodes nonfiction television series, should everyone who's ever been on a cable tv segment get an encyclopedia article? WP:BIO doesn't say "If you're on the Discovery Channel you're good to go." --NEMT 22:39, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Rewrite Or something. "Jim Bob Duggar", who is notable as a member of the house of representatives, redirects here.  Article should be rewritten to emphasize Duggar and de-emphasize his family, renamed back to "Jim Bob Duggar" and redirect under the original title to there put in. - Richfife 22:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment He actually was only a member of the Arkansas House of Representatives (his national run failed). So he may not be notable after all. - Richfife 22:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Jim Bob Duggar was not a member of the US House of Representatives, he is a former member of the Arkansas House. Whether or not this is notable is unknown to me, regardless, his family certainly is not. --NEMT 22:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep: They were featured in a TV show... I mean, if that doesn't shriek notability, what does? --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 08:20, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment They were featured on a TV show - just like thousands of people not currently given wikipedia articles, you mean? --NEMT 08:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Yep. I mean, it was a channel of the Discovery Channel congolomerate. Not some local access stuff. So, yep. --Signed and Sealed, JJJJust (T C) 08:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment So everyone who has ever been featured on a cable tv program segment has established encyclopedic notability? Sorry, I don't buy it, and neither does WP:BIO.  Maybe if this family had a TV series dedicated to them it would be a different story; but a few sporadic appearances for the sake of demonstrating a large family and/or radical religious views does not establish notability. --NEMT 08:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment This article was moved from Jim Bob Duggar, who would be notable as a member of a state legislature per WP:BIO. Being on several television programs could constitute the multiple external sources needed to be notable. if the Duggars are the feature of the programs.  However, the article is filled with minutiae from their daily lives and does not answer the question "Why should I care about the subject?" If the only source is the television programs it is unlikely to be expanded/fixed unless a WP editor happens to catch a rerun of the program. No vote from me on this one yet. JChap2007 14:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jim Bob Duggar. I can envision people looking this up on Wikipedia, and they should certainly get something, but I'm not sure the family is more notable than Congressman Duggar himself. --♥ «Charles A. L.» 14:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Isotope23&mdash;though my reasoning is unchanged. --♥ «Charles A. L.» 19:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge back to Jim Bob Duggar... They were featured on 2 Discovery channel specials and if I'm not mistaken, the number of children he had came up in his run for office. Conceivably someone may care to look this up... but I'm not sure a seperate article is the answer.  Any info that is verified can be added to Mr. Duggar's article and that should suffice. --Isotope23 17:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Jim Bob Duggar. I just noticed that someone redirected Jim Bob Duggar here back in April.  Lo and behold, there was a halfway decent, sourced article just waiting for someone to come along and pull it out of the history... so I did.  Jim Bob meets WP:BIO and this article should just redirect there in the event anyone comes to Wikipedia looking for the Duggar family.  Redirects are cheap.--Isotope23 18:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I find your redirect solution much more appropriate than the current Duggar family article, as it establishes the notability of Jim Bob Duggar, and includes information on his large family. --NEMT 18:11, 21 August 2006 (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.