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 Procedural close. This is the wrong venue for a merge discussion. Use the article talk page and proposed merge procedures. Bringing an article here with "hopes for a merge consensus" isn't appropriate in deletion venue, although it is often the consensus that arises. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:32, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Romney[edit]

Josh Romney (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable son of Mitt Romney considering running for public office. I have been unable to find any references to him other than his father's campaign or his contemplated run for congress. I had proposed to merge this article with Mitt Romney, but could not find concensus with its creator. Mstuczynski (talk) 22:32, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge article to the Personal Life section of the Mitt Romney article. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and wanting to run for Congress (which isn't notable) is not the equivalent of actually running for Congress (which, in most cases, would be). Also, being unable to find consensus with an editor for merging/splitting an article should not be a valid reason for deleting an article entirely.--TBC!?! 22:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I whole heartedly concur. I was hoping for a merge concensus here. That is why I mentioned it in the nom. Mstuczynski (talk) 22:57, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Do not merge, do not delete - I don't think "non-notable son" is a fair or accurate. He has received significant national attention in the last year while campaigning on behalf of his father. While that in itself does not warrant an article, he is being mentioned in the national media as a candidate for Congress. This only became known in the past two days, yet it has already been covered by numerous well known media outlets, such as Fox News, the Huffington Post, the Washington Post, the Drudge Report, and more.

Update...In light of the other feedback here, if a decision to remove a separate article is made before any additional campaign details emerge, I would suggest merge, either with the Mitt Romney article, the Pratt-Romney article, or both (Mitt Romney campaign details in his article, Josh Romney business/Congressional details on the Pratt-Romney article, with the possibility of restoring this article as is if an official candidacy is announced). Jrclark (talk) 18:37, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand why there is so much pressure to delete or merge this article - it hasn't even been proposed as a 'merge' for a day.

We'll know for sure in the next three weeks if he will be an official candidate. If he choose not to run, then yes, I would suggest we delete or merge the article. In the meantime, this is a nationally known person running for a high office with national press coverage.Jrclark (talk) 23:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The notability of an article cannot be determined by a future, speculative event, especially as one as uncertain as that. If the candidacy for Congress is confirmed, then the article could merit a split, but until then there isn't enough to warrant a separate article.--TBC!?! 23:42, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added some more sources tonight to the article, to demonstrate notability. Will continue to do so as the national press continues to cover this. Jrclark (talk) 23:47, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once again, the notability of the article is based mostly on speculation, even if news of a possible (but unconfirmed) candidacy is released tonight.--TBC!?! 00:12, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just added some more Josh Romney references/articles (per Wikipedia recommendations) from the past year, from across the country, to try to further demonstrate notability. Jrclark (talk) 00:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Going over the references you've added, most of them essentially state that Josh had been campaigning for his father, which isn't unexpected (as he's Mitt's son and all) and certainly not enough to warrant a separate article.--TBC!?! 00:32, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe they demonstrate that he is not only notable in Utah, but also across the country. None of his four brothers have received this much press or notability, nor have any other children on the campaign trail that I know of, other than Chelsea Clinton. Again, I believe he is a notable figure who continues to receive national attention and may be running for the Federal House of Representatives. Jrclark (talk) 00:37, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge. Being a candidate for office is not enough for WP:BIO, and being a son of a presidential candidate is somewhat less notable than being a son of a President, which itself is not inherently notable. At this point there is little coverage of him that is independent of his father. --Dhartung | Talk 08:18, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete When he does something notable on his own, he can have an article. Mangoe (talk) 15:58, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge and Delete - as per the nom and TBC's comments.BWH76 (talk) 06:49, 3 March 2008 (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.