The result was DELETE (should be redirect to Duke of Manchester, but there's an issue with that too).. There's no consensus either way to Keep or Delete the article, the discussion is fairly evenly balanced, although the stronger set of arguments probably falls on the Delete side. There are too many people insisting because he inherited a title he is notable, but there is sufficient doubt regarding whether he has inherited a title (and even if he did there is a question about inheriting notability. The title no longer confers legislative responsibilities because of the Lords reforms; he's not a member of the House of Lords and plays no role in the UK legislative process, all but extinguishing any notability he may once have had pre Lords reform). He no longer has any public role and has never sought any sort of public position. I'm sufficiently satisfied to agree that he isn't notable, but the title of Duke of Manchester is and it is of interest to readers of the article Duke of Manchester who the current Duke could be. If there was some confirmation Alexander Montagu is definitely the 13th Duke, I will explicitly leave the option to create a redirect available to anybody able to provide cast iron referencing at Duke of Manchester regarding the current title holder (or whether the title is presently vacant etc) but as there's a question hanging over that at the moment, I'm going to Delete the article. Nick ( talk) 16:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC) reply
Mr. Montagu does not pass Wikipedia's "notability" bar. He has an inherited title, but that's about it. He has not been the subject of any single newspaper article focusing on his life and times, hopes, fears, dreams, successes, failures etc... let alone multiple ones, let alone the sorts of book length biographies/long features in the quality press that would be required at minimum to treat him fairly. He has been married three times, and it's clear that his first two wives don't like him very much. There are a smattering of articles that mention his disputes with his former wives (and their claims against him, which he disputes), and a brief flurry of interest when the legitimacy of one of his marriages was questioned. However, the courts ruled that his marriage was legit and that was the end of that. Furthermore, the press frequently repeats claims made by interested parties in disputes without getting to the bottom of the matter - the ground truth. An ephemeral newspaper article is one thing; the top search engine hit for a person's name, presumably for eternity, that presents itself as a neutral encyclopedia article, is something else again. The only way an article could fairly be written on this man would be to do an extensive amount of original research, which is disallowed at Wikipedia. He has clearly had some minor legal troubles - fair or unfair I can't say. But so have millions of people. He is being singled out purely because of an inherited title (a fact which he had no control over) and basic empathy should make this an easy delete. He has a brief mention on the Wikipedia article on the noble family he belongs to, which is appropriate and sufficient. (Full disclosure, this came to my attention after chatting briefly about it with Montagu on the web forum Wikipediocracy.) Dan Murphy ( talk) 18:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply
The result was DELETE (should be redirect to Duke of Manchester, but there's an issue with that too).. There's no consensus either way to Keep or Delete the article, the discussion is fairly evenly balanced, although the stronger set of arguments probably falls on the Delete side. There are too many people insisting because he inherited a title he is notable, but there is sufficient doubt regarding whether he has inherited a title (and even if he did there is a question about inheriting notability. The title no longer confers legislative responsibilities because of the Lords reforms; he's not a member of the House of Lords and plays no role in the UK legislative process, all but extinguishing any notability he may once have had pre Lords reform). He no longer has any public role and has never sought any sort of public position. I'm sufficiently satisfied to agree that he isn't notable, but the title of Duke of Manchester is and it is of interest to readers of the article Duke of Manchester who the current Duke could be. If there was some confirmation Alexander Montagu is definitely the 13th Duke, I will explicitly leave the option to create a redirect available to anybody able to provide cast iron referencing at Duke of Manchester regarding the current title holder (or whether the title is presently vacant etc) but as there's a question hanging over that at the moment, I'm going to Delete the article. Nick ( talk) 16:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC) reply
Mr. Montagu does not pass Wikipedia's "notability" bar. He has an inherited title, but that's about it. He has not been the subject of any single newspaper article focusing on his life and times, hopes, fears, dreams, successes, failures etc... let alone multiple ones, let alone the sorts of book length biographies/long features in the quality press that would be required at minimum to treat him fairly. He has been married three times, and it's clear that his first two wives don't like him very much. There are a smattering of articles that mention his disputes with his former wives (and their claims against him, which he disputes), and a brief flurry of interest when the legitimacy of one of his marriages was questioned. However, the courts ruled that his marriage was legit and that was the end of that. Furthermore, the press frequently repeats claims made by interested parties in disputes without getting to the bottom of the matter - the ground truth. An ephemeral newspaper article is one thing; the top search engine hit for a person's name, presumably for eternity, that presents itself as a neutral encyclopedia article, is something else again. The only way an article could fairly be written on this man would be to do an extensive amount of original research, which is disallowed at Wikipedia. He has clearly had some minor legal troubles - fair or unfair I can't say. But so have millions of people. He is being singled out purely because of an inherited title (a fact which he had no control over) and basic empathy should make this an easy delete. He has a brief mention on the Wikipedia article on the noble family he belongs to, which is appropriate and sufficient. (Full disclosure, this came to my attention after chatting briefly about it with Montagu on the web forum Wikipediocracy.) Dan Murphy ( talk) 18:22, 15 June 2013 (UTC) reply