Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Anstruther-Thomson of Charleton and Carntyne


 * 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 List of Vanity Fair (British magazine) caricatures (1880–84). CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 06:22, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

John Anstruther-Thomson of Charleton and Carntyne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I, too, like celebrated 19th century British gentlemen but I do not think that being solely a celebrated 19th century British gentleman can be a justification for an article. He is not Beau Brummell, after all, is he? The Traditionalist (talk) 17:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:43, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:03, 14 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment I am not finding much except passing mentions, but I would be rather surprised to find that someone caricatured by Spy in Vanity Fair was not notable at the time. I suspect I am missing something. PWilkinson (talk) 23:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Many of these people currently do not have an article and I believe that they do not deserve one. This list has many redlinks and they most of them seem to be either minor sportsmen or minor socialites (there is, of course, the occasional MP and the occasional railway baron, who do diserve an article). Being a minor socialite could be enough for a caricature but is not considered notable, even by that time′s standards. And this is what this particular gentleman was.--The Traditionalist (talk) 04:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 10:34, 20 July 2015 (UTC) Suggestion: if it is felt that having been caricatured in Vanity Fair does not indicate notability, how about merging the non-notable articles with the lists of caricatures themselves? In Anstruther-Thomson's case it would be something like this (though formatted more neatly):

Opera hat (talk) 12:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

This looks like a good idea, but unless we find more articles of people with a Vanity Fair caricature which should be deleted, this one's entry will look bizarrely unique.--The Traditionalist (talk) 04:42, 21 July 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  Talk   17:58, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a nice picture, but his career - JP, DL, Hon. Colonel is just not enough for notability. I so not think we go in for galleries of Vanity Fair cartoons.  Peterkingiron (talk) 18:20, 1 August 2015 (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.