Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Caledon Grey Egerton


 * 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 delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

John Caledon Grey Egerton

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't see any reason for notability. Didn't receive the baronetcy himself (for those who may be in doubt, a baronet is not a peer, doesn't sit in the House of Lords, and therefore does not qualify under WP:POLITICIAN). Or indeed any other honours. A junior military officer. Just a genealogical article. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 12:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete likely unless this can be improved as I found nothing better than some Books links. SwisterTwister   talk  07:16, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam Sailor Talk! 09:03, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:51, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kharkiv07  ( T ) 14:37, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep his war record can certainly be sourced to newspapers of the era. He almost certainly has an obit for the came reason someone has given him a Wikipedia page: he inherited a baronetcy.  Also,  he inherited a baronetcy, ergo, reliable sources on him exist.  The lives of baronets get recorded.  At the very least, there will be news reports of his birth, marriages, war service, coming into the title, and death.   Tagged for sourcing.E.M.Gregory (talk) 15:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Being a captain and inheriting a baronetcy have never been considered good reasons to give someone an article. You will notice that only first baronets usually get articles unless they personally did something significant. He didn't. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:15, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources that would establish notability are cited here or in the article. "They are out there" is a weak argument, see WP:BURDEN, and nobody seems to want to argue inherent notability just because of the title.  Sandstein   19:19, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete The article basically only covers 2 pieces of information about this person: that he was a soldier who fought in 2 wars and that he was married twice. The fact that he "received" a "baronet" is not even mentioned in the article, I had to learn that from this AfD. --Reinoutr (talk) 07:37, 17 October 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.