Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sir Richard Cory-Wright, 4th Baronet


 * 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   merge to Cory-Wright baronets. It seems the consensus is somewhere between delete and merge, so rounding to merge (with obviously no obligation on the destination to actually integrate the content, if deemed inappropriate) slakr  \ talk / 05:09, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

Sir Richard Cory-Wright, 4th Baronet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non-notable aristocrat Flaming Ferrari (talk) 15:56, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Entirely non-notable.TheLongTone (talk) 01:07, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Surely being knighted is some sort of notability?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 09:50, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * A knighthood can be inherited, unlike notability.TheLongTone (talk) 10:18, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * So that makes him completly non-notable?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 10:55, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The article contains nothing like a claim of notability, and an internet search shows nothing either: no newspaper mentions for instance. Having parents is not notable.TheLongTone (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * All hereditary Baronetcies are styled Sir (name), (N)th Baronet. The title including the Sir prefix is not earned but rather inherited. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 12:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * No, a knighthood can't be inherited. A baronetcy, which he holds, can be however. All knights are thus inherently notable, but not all baronets. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Keep I started this article because his name was red-linked on a list of his family (see here Cory-Wright baronets) and he is the current holder of the title. I believe people come here looking for info even on these minor aristocrats and the article should stand. Jack1956 (talk) 10:38, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment I think this article is more of genealogical interest than encyclopedic value. Many Baronetcies were in fact purchased and have been passed down through families. A baronet is different from a peerage, where the latter up until 1999 had the right to take up a seat in the House of Lords. Rather a baronet is non-notable in their own right, and I see nothing else in this guy's career history to suggest he is notable for other reasons. Flaming Ferrari (talk) 12:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:08, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment see the statement from Jimbo Wales on the other similar article nominated for deletion here regarding having a complete series of such articles completed despite the possible lack of notability of some family members. Jack1956 (talk) 17:47, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Different situation. Jimbo was referring to peers, not baronets. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete We should keep the higher nobility, but not baronets. (per JW).  DGG ( talk ) 03:22, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge all into Cory-Wright baronets. In the past, we have deleted some (if not most) individual baronets, but kept a few who have independent notability. Bearian (talk) 22:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Merge as Bearian: be looks like a NN businessman, who happends to ahve an handle on his name. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:31, 17 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.