Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Moreton, Lord Moreton


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 01:11, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

James Moreton, Lord Moreton

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I did a little editing on this article based on information in other wikipedia articles that are now wikilinked. Then I went to find Reliable references I was unable to find any. Jeepday (talk) 17:32, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Does not meet any of the criteria in WP:BIO. Even when this young man succeeds to the barony he may not meet WP:BIO because hereditary peers are no longer automatically members of the House of Lords (the upper assembly of the UK Parliament - his father was a member before 1999 and therefore meets WP:BIO). -- Charlene 19:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per above argument about notability Corpx 19:33, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It is just a courtesy title at present-- but when he does succeed it will be to a Dukedom, & I think  then he'd merit an article  for at least the higher nobility will remain N, even if not in Parliament.DGG 21:54, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment *cough* to an Earldom, DGG, not a Dukedom. A bit down the line. --Dhartung | Talk 00:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, at best merits brief mention in his father's article, and the Earl of Ducie, which already exist. --Dhartung | Talk 00:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. His father is just a Earl, but if he does succeed, he will be notable. An Earldom is still the second level of the British peerage. --Bduke 00:49, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment *cough* third, behind dukes and marquesses. -- Charlene 01:59, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Mea culpa. You are right, but an Earl is still notable. --Bduke 02:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete No accomplishments or references to satisfy WP:BIO. He does work at a power station, per the article. Is that enough to justify an article in Wikipedia? Perhaps the above commentors who were confused about Dukes versus Earls were just thinking of Gene Chandler, who in 1962 became the Duke of Earl . Edison 03:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 06:06, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 06:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete notability is not inherited at this level and I dispute whether any ole earl who hasn't done much or been much in the news is notable. Carlossuarez46 19:55, 25 June 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.