Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry Hager


 * 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 Merge into Jenna Bush. --Haemo 02:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Henry Hager

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * He is not in line of succession of royalty. The mentions in various sources are only trivial mentions due to his relationships with notable people (his father and Jenna Bush).  He hasn't done anything of note. Dismas |(talk) 22:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jenna Bush. I completely agree, the coverage by the media is only trivial. For now, it's better to do the merge.  Blue Ag09  (Talk) 22:09, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  22:19, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jenna Bush per BlueAg09 comments above.--Getaway 22:32, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N, notability isn't transferable. -- Nen yedi  • (Deeds•Talk) 23:25, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * An AfD this early on is stupid -- Y not? 23:42, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per multiple non-trivial published sources about this person. -- Y not? 23:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jenna Bush. There currently doesn't seem to be anything that couldn't be better handled in that article by a "Henry Hager, who is [blah blah]" clause. No objection to recreating in the future if more to say appears, though. --Delirium 01:08, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with the others here. Merge into Jenna Bush. --googol 01:58, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge Himself is not very notable at all.--JForget 02:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Merge to Jenna Bush (Hager). No independent notability, despite his White House post, which was fairly minor. --Dhartung | Talk 03:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete He's not notable unless he actually marries the Bush daughter.. let's wait and see if that really happens before we call him "notable". Tom M. 04:18, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep He's been the primary subject of multiple, reliable, independent sources stretching back to 2005. Notability is overwhelmingly established.  He's passed Wikipedia's notability guideline for over two years; this isn't a recent development even if some people are just hearing of him for the first time today.  People might not like it, but the fact of the matter is that getting engaged to the daughter of the most powerful person in the world is something that the media has decided for us is highly notable. --JayHenry 05:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep He's sufficiently notable. Fjl 09:02, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems like he may be making news in the future. Do we really want to merge and then unmerge later?  michaelbraun 8:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC) — Michaelbraun (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep Well i think its notable as its been in the news and he will become the son of Bush, but unless a lot can be written about him merge him with jenna. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.233.180 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep I think as the media swarms around this topic a seperate page for Mr. hager will be justified. 70.21.84.235 — 70.21.84.235 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete Has not accomplished any notable feats whatsoever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.249.47.11 (talk • contribs)
 * Merge to Jenna Bush. He's only notable because of his fiancee, and she's barely notable herself. Ariadne55 16:40, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Only notable for his connection to Jenna Bush. DCEdwards1966 17:37, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge him into Jenna Bush. Getting engaged to the daughter of a notable person does not make one notable. Fails WP:BIO. Edison 17:53, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jenna Bush--SkyWalker 19:05, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Nearly all of his information is presented in Jenna_Bush. His article contains the same information, so it would just be a redundancy. I don't think he'll be making news in the near future; he's still an MBA student looking to complete his studies next spring (according to a Washington Post article) If he's going to run for or get elected to a political office or do something similarly noteworthy, it's quite unlikely that will happen until he's done with school. For now, there really isn't anything important about him besides his connection to Jenna Bush that would need a separate article. The media's spotlight is really titled more toward Jenna than to Hager.  Blue Ag09  (Talk) 21:14, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of people will want to know who he is and will want more information about him, the fact that most the information on his article can be found on Jenna's article is because no one has taken the time to do a proper bio about him. His fame will only increase from now on.--Joebengo 21:55, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Should we delete all articles of people in the spotlight because of who they date or marry? Such as Kate Middleton, and Chelsy Davy.--Joebengo 22:09, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per jayhenry Thesmothete 14:37, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Joebengo says "no one has taken the time to do a proper bio about him" ... that's because there is nothing notable about him to write about. He is a college kid engaged to a well known (not notable) girl.  There are lots and lots of engaged college kids .. and they, like Hager, are not notable.  Tom M. 15:35, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, for the reasons given by previous keepers.--Bedford 04:49, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I looked at Notability (people), and the only debatable criterion is the first one listed. Has Henry Hager been the subject of published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of him? No, Mr. Hager hasn't really been the subject of either of the sources cited in the article, and they certainly don't go into great detail. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, are there multiple independent sources to establish notability? Our article cites two sources, but I'm not convinced that they provide nontrivial coverage to establish notability. Verifiable content not supported by multiple independent sources may be appropriate for merger with another article, so let it be merged into Jenna Bush.  W ODU P  01:23, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge into Jenna Bush. It's all been said, so I'll simply say 'merge.' JamesLucas 02:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge as per comment above... Booksworm Sprechen-sie Koala? 09:49, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge or delete Not notable on his own per WP:BIO and WP:NN. --Strothra 17:37, 21 August 2007 (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.