Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Spencer, Viscount Althorp


 * 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 no consensus. The potential for a merge can continue in a discussion on an article talk page. (non-admin closure) NorthAmerica1000 18:12, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Louis Spencer, Viscount Althorp

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Despite being the eldest son of a notable Earl and related to the royal family albeit not in line to the throne, I believe this courtesy viscount does not qualify as notable in his own right Flaming Ferrari (talk) 15:29, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - in light of the fact that he has been, and will likely continue to be, connected to important figures in high society in Great Britain. He is closely related to the royal family, and will thus likely continue to be mentioned (at least in passing) in the media. Bearian (talk) 22:15, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 22:54, 15 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge to Charles Spencer, 9th Earl Spencer. There's a lot of press coverage of his father, but I'm not seeing much about Louis. When he becomes viscount, or just as he grows older and marries/starts a family, he's likely to get more press coverage. If I'm missing media coverage about him (and not just in connection with his family), then keep. --Colapeninsula (talk) 15:52, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge to his father. He is clearly still NN.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:30, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No objection to keeping if others agree. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:03, 22 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think I'm coming down on the side of keeping articles on peers or their heirs, whether or not they sit in the House of Lords, as all their predecessors did (and therefore all meet WP:POLITICIAN) and it would be slightly odd and not of value to the project to break the chain of Wikipedia articles. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:41, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. He is the heir to an important earldom and a first cousin of Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, the future King. Additionally, he is the nephew of Diana, one of the most famous women in the World, and the heir to her ancestral home which is what cause me personally to view his article. Eric Cable  |  Talk  18:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
 * That argument would be right if notability was inherited, but the WP consensus is that it is not. Peterkingiron (talk) 15:05, 22 March 2014 (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.