Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George P. Bush

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. --CharlotteWebb 21:05, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

George P. Bush

This guy's life really has completely no relevance to the world Nwe 14:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong keep I know I'm to assume good faith, but checking this user's edits, it seems this may be a POV deletion. Wildthing61476 14:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • But assuming good faith, as you should, how do you justify the article being useful to anyone.Nwe 16:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Simple, he meets the requirements listed in WP:BIO Wildthing61476 16:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious keep. He's the son of a governor, nephew of the current US President and grandson of a former President. Methinks you might want to read WP:BIO. 66.30.250.199 16:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep I agree what he meets the requirements listed. As a sidenote, I also agree with the possibility of a POV deletion. -Shazbot85Talk 16:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • From what I see he clearly does not meet the criteria of WP:BIONwe 16:36, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Oh, and how is that? Wildthing61476 16:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well tell me how it does.Nwe 16:40, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • To start with: The person has been the primary subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the person. (Multiple similar stories describing a single day's news event only count as one coverage.). Wildthing61476 16:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nwe, you chose to nominate this article for deletion. You're going to need to give a better reason than "This guy's life really has completely no relevance to the world". 66.30.250.199 16:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have, see above. So when has he been the subject of "multiple non-trivial published works"?Nwe 16:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Are you kidding me? Gamaliel 16:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Per above. Has enough relationships and public reference to make worthwhile. StuffOfInterest 16:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Really, since when has being related to famous people been a reason for getting a bio on wikipedia?Nwe 16:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but it's not as obvious a keeper as everyone seems to be saying. If there was nothing else to say about him besides being a Governor's relative, I would have voted delete. Being related to notable people does not automatically confer notability. wikipediatrix 16:49, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • So what else is there to say about him?Nwe 16:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just what the article says: he's been a very high-profile member of the Republican party and the Bush campaign, spoke at the national convention, and has been the subject of much media scrutiny. This is why he has an article but Kenny Guinn's son, for instance, doesn't. wikipediatrix 16:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per wikipediatrix. Erechtheus 16:57, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per wikipediatrix's nice succinct explanation. NawlinWiki 17:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per wikipediatrix (is there an echo in here?) Heimstern Läufer 17:37, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This person is clearly notable, and fits the criteria for notability not because he is a member of a 'political dynasty' but because he's made news on his own during his trips to Mexico and elsewhere, and is considered a possible future political candidate. He is as worthy of having an article, or more so, as other children in famous political families (Courtney Kennedy Hill, Matthew Maxwell Taylor Kennedy and Al Gore III, for example.) If this article's deleted, let's take a look at these other articles, too. That said, this article is constantly being vandalized, and should be semi-protected, at least. - Nhprman List 17:58, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and close AfD per WP:SNOW. PT (s-s-s-s) 18:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This discussion should be closed. I agree with Nwe that being related to a governor doesn't constitute an article on Wikipedia, but this Bush has his own notoriety. He was speaker at the convention, and seems active in political affairs.Trevor 18:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per wikipediatrix... though it baffles me why someone who has done so little has enough written about him to meet WP:BIO.--Isotope23 19:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. Why is this AfD still here? VoiceOfReason 20:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Nhprman. I can guarantee that the media is watching this person, if you know what I mean. JungleCat talk/contrib 20:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/George_P._Bush&oldid=1137875760"