Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Bonham Carter


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 01:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Edward Bonham Carter

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Sole reason for article seems to be he's the brother of Helena Bonham Carter. In he's own right he's just a hedge fund manager and that doesn't meet notability criteria as I understand them HornetMike (talk) 22:45, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 November 27.  — cyberbot I  Notify Online 03:17, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. Being profiled in pretty much every major UK national newspaper over the course of ten years meets the notability criteria as I understand them. At least one of these profiles doesn't even mention Helena, some don't mention her until the second, third or fourth paragraph. Some examples that aren't in the article: Independent interview, 2010, Guardian interview, 2010, Financial Times profile, 2007, Daily Telegraph, 2001. I also found reference to a Money Observer profile, not online. If I waded through the pages of results that come up in a Newsbank or Google Archives search, I'm sure I would find more. Moswento talky 14:37, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 17:25, 27 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Sufficient for GNG and having famous relations does not disqualify. --AJHingston (talk) 19:15, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep fantabulous misinterpretation of WP:NOTINHERITED which is WP:NOTPOLICY anyway. This does not say that "close relatives of famous persons cannot themselves be notable" or that "close relatives of famous persons have their notability diminished by being closely related to said famous person".  The truth is that being closely related to someone famous gives you a little notability, although this is usually not enough for an article.  Here's some directories  .  This is just utter nonsense. Barney the barney barney (talk) 20:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Jupiter is a major fund management group. As its CEO for the past 14 years, he is clearly notable in his own right.  WP:NOTINHERITED is a good principle: subjects need to be notable in their own right; and he is.  Relatives of notable people do not need a higher hurdle than others. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:46, 2 December 2013 (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.