Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marion Christopher Barry


 * 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 speedy keep. WP:SNOW Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:31, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Marion Christopher Barry

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Barrybrigade (talk) 13:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)Creating deletion discussion for Marion Christopher Barry
 * Comment for nom Could you replace the tag with your reason for nomination? RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:55, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 August 16.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 14:22, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I am not even sure if Barry would have been notable if he had won the election he ran in, but he lost, so clearly does not meet the notability guidelines for politicians.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:38, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep He doesn't meet WP:POLITICIAN, but he does meet WP:GNG. He's notable because of all of the substantial coverage in reliable, secondary sources he got. It's all cited in the article, so I don't feel any need to source dump here. I doubt he would've gotten that coverage if he was anybody else's son, but the same could be said for any number of people and that doesn't make them any less notable (see for example, Ivanka Trump and Chelsea Clinton). – Muboshgu (talk) 19:17, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep not only as a cautionary tale against drug use, but as a failed politician and the son of a prominent politician, Barry is notable.  I usually HATE merged articles, but you could combine him and his father, creating a subsection about Marion Jr.  I am strongly against delete however.  205.144.213.202 (talk) 19:29, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep no reason for deletion given, seems to be a new account registered today based on complaints of WP:ITN recent deaths nominations here and here. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:42, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep The article was notable and unquestioned before his death. He passes and now its a possible AfD? There are so many other articles on Wikipedia to consider before this one. Bangabandhu (talk) 00:43, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Muboshgu. Obviously meets WP:GNG criteria and no reason was given to delete. APK whisper in my ear  03:09, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per WP:DEL failure. —  Wylie pedia  04:27, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as this nomination seems intended to prevent the page's posting to RD per the new criteria. 331dot (talk) 14:06, 17 August 2016 (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.