Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Henry Lyttelton (1820–1884)


 * 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 Keep. Andrew D. (talk) 05:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

William Henry Lyttelton (1820–1884)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unremarkable minor clergyman (rank of rector / canon only). Status as son of aristocrat and husband of the daughter of a bishop appears to be basis of claimed notability ("he is an important local figure"). Dubbin u &#124; t &#124; c 07:03, 14 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Music1201  talk  01:47, 21 July 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Yellow Dingo &#160; (talk)  06:53, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:38, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:38, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 02:38, 31 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. Subject has his own DNB entry. StAnselm (talk) 03:19, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * What is that and why is that a speedy keep criterion? Jclemens (talk) 03:47, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I've fixed the link - I'm talking about the Dictionary of National Biography. Anyone with an entry there is automatically notable. See Articles for deletion/John Drysdale (moderator), etc. StAnselm (talk) 04:06, 31 July 2016 (UTC)
 * That page says "We always keep everyone with an entry in the DNB for starters" but gives no policy source for this nor does it explain who "we" is. The criteria for DNB entry are not the same as for Wikipedia notability and this case seems to serve as a good example of someone who appears to have an entry (perhaps on the basis of being the non-notable son of a noble and a non-notable clergyman) but lacks notability in his own right per WP:BIO.
 * I don't disagree that that seems a reasonable policy to have, but I've never heard of it before. Jclemens (talk) 04:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, I don't think it is enshrined in policy. I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (people) to see whether it should be mentioned on that page. StAnselm (talk) 04:45, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep J. M. Rigg, ‘Lyttelton, William Henry (1820–1884)’, rev. G. Martin Murphy, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2004:accessed 31 July 2016. He is in the current edition of DNB.  If I had been selecting who to include in DNB, I might not have included him, but WP policy is that those included in DNB (and other national biographic dictionaries are notable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:12, 31 July 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.