- 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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 18:19, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Francis William Lascelles
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Francis William Lascelles ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
British official (not that Lascelles). It is not clear how he might meet WP:BIO. His position as Clerk of the House of Lords was an administrative one and does not confer automatic notability. Nothing in his unremarkable biography otherwise suggests notability. The cited sources appear to be mostly primary or unreliable sources, and a Google Books search finds nothing of interest. Sandstein 17:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 17:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The man held an exceptionally important post (one of the two chief administrative officers of the British Parliament) and was knighted, for crying out loud. Meets
WP:GNG. Meets
WP:ANYBIO #1. This deletionism is frankly getting silly. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
15:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Holding an "important" post (or rather, an administrative role in the politically unimportant house of the legislature) does not, by itself, establish notability. GNG does, which requires substantial coverage in reliable sources, which you do not cite. As to ANYBIO, being knighted is, as I understand it, pretty much automatic at that level of administrative seniority (cf. "
Sir Humphrey"); notably, the article does not imply that he obtained the award for any particular achievement. And receiving a title is only an indicator that a person is likely notable, not that they are guaranteed inclusion. If we do not have substantial secondary sources, we have no basis for an article.
Sandstein
20:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The "achievement" for which he received his knighthood was being appointed to the post. Why do you think people receive high awards? Because they distinguish themselves in their chosen field. Which he clearly did. The House of Lords is not "the politically unimportant house of the legislature"! It is one of the two houses of the legislature and its clerk is no less important than that of the House of Commons. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The House of Lords, like the monarch, is now an essentially decorative feature of the British constitution. Political power lies in the House of Commons. In any case, since the post of clerk does not come with automatic notability under our rules, neither does a title awarded merely for becoming clerk.
Sandstein
12:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- You clearly do not understand the concept of being honoured for reaching the top of one's chosen profession. It's no different from any other knight. Sir Ian McKellen, for instance, has also been knighted for reaching the top of his profession. The difference is simply that his profession is high-profile and that of a parliamentary official is not (or, at least, not to the general populace or those who write on the internet - although given he died in 1979 even that wouldn't be relevant). Neither is any more or less notable within their profession. And that's what we should be looking at if we don't want to further degenerate from a genuine encyclopaedia to a catalogue of pop culture, as we sadly appear to rapidly be doing. That's one of the reasons for the existence of WP:ANYBIO #1 - to catch people who are not high-profile but still notable enough to receive high honours. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- The House of Lords, like the monarch, is now an essentially decorative feature of the British constitution. Political power lies in the House of Commons. In any case, since the post of clerk does not come with automatic notability under our rules, neither does a title awarded merely for becoming clerk.
Sandstein
12:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The "achievement" for which he received his knighthood was being appointed to the post. Why do you think people receive high awards? Because they distinguish themselves in their chosen field. Which he clearly did. The House of Lords is not "the politically unimportant house of the legislature"! It is one of the two houses of the legislature and its clerk is no less important than that of the House of Commons. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Holding an "important" post (or rather, an administrative role in the politically unimportant house of the legislature) does not, by itself, establish notability. GNG does, which requires substantial coverage in reliable sources, which you do not cite. As to ANYBIO, being knighted is, as I understand it, pretty much automatic at that level of administrative seniority (cf. "
Sir Humphrey"); notably, the article does not imply that he obtained the award for any particular achievement. And receiving a title is only an indicator that a person is likely notable, not that they are guaranteed inclusion. If we do not have substantial secondary sources, we have no basis for an article.
Sandstein
20:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG. Mztourist ( talk) 03:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:15, 30 June 2024 (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.
- 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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 18:19, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Francis William Lascelles
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Francis William Lascelles ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
British official (not that Lascelles). It is not clear how he might meet WP:BIO. His position as Clerk of the House of Lords was an administrative one and does not confer automatic notability. Nothing in his unremarkable biography otherwise suggests notability. The cited sources appear to be mostly primary or unreliable sources, and a Google Books search finds nothing of interest. Sandstein 17:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 17:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The man held an exceptionally important post (one of the two chief administrative officers of the British Parliament) and was knighted, for crying out loud. Meets
WP:GNG. Meets
WP:ANYBIO #1. This deletionism is frankly getting silly. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
15:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Holding an "important" post (or rather, an administrative role in the politically unimportant house of the legislature) does not, by itself, establish notability. GNG does, which requires substantial coverage in reliable sources, which you do not cite. As to ANYBIO, being knighted is, as I understand it, pretty much automatic at that level of administrative seniority (cf. "
Sir Humphrey"); notably, the article does not imply that he obtained the award for any particular achievement. And receiving a title is only an indicator that a person is likely notable, not that they are guaranteed inclusion. If we do not have substantial secondary sources, we have no basis for an article.
Sandstein
20:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The "achievement" for which he received his knighthood was being appointed to the post. Why do you think people receive high awards? Because they distinguish themselves in their chosen field. Which he clearly did. The House of Lords is not "the politically unimportant house of the legislature"! It is one of the two houses of the legislature and its clerk is no less important than that of the House of Commons. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The House of Lords, like the monarch, is now an essentially decorative feature of the British constitution. Political power lies in the House of Commons. In any case, since the post of clerk does not come with automatic notability under our rules, neither does a title awarded merely for becoming clerk.
Sandstein
12:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- You clearly do not understand the concept of being honoured for reaching the top of one's chosen profession. It's no different from any other knight. Sir Ian McKellen, for instance, has also been knighted for reaching the top of his profession. The difference is simply that his profession is high-profile and that of a parliamentary official is not (or, at least, not to the general populace or those who write on the internet - although given he died in 1979 even that wouldn't be relevant). Neither is any more or less notable within their profession. And that's what we should be looking at if we don't want to further degenerate from a genuine encyclopaedia to a catalogue of pop culture, as we sadly appear to rapidly be doing. That's one of the reasons for the existence of WP:ANYBIO #1 - to catch people who are not high-profile but still notable enough to receive high honours. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- The House of Lords, like the monarch, is now an essentially decorative feature of the British constitution. Political power lies in the House of Commons. In any case, since the post of clerk does not come with automatic notability under our rules, neither does a title awarded merely for becoming clerk.
Sandstein
12:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- The "achievement" for which he received his knighthood was being appointed to the post. Why do you think people receive high awards? Because they distinguish themselves in their chosen field. Which he clearly did. The House of Lords is not "the politically unimportant house of the legislature"! It is one of the two houses of the legislature and its clerk is no less important than that of the House of Commons. --
Necrothesp (
talk)
10:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Holding an "important" post (or rather, an administrative role in the politically unimportant house of the legislature) does not, by itself, establish notability. GNG does, which requires substantial coverage in reliable sources, which you do not cite. As to ANYBIO, being knighted is, as I understand it, pretty much automatic at that level of administrative seniority (cf. "
Sir Humphrey"); notably, the article does not imply that he obtained the award for any particular achievement. And receiving a title is only an indicator that a person is likely notable, not that they are guaranteed inclusion. If we do not have substantial secondary sources, we have no basis for an article.
Sandstein
20:27, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete fails WP:GNG. Mztourist ( talk) 03:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no! 22:15, 30 June 2024 (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.