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 redirect to Chelsea Clinton. The most reasonable thing to do at the moment. Later, the article can be brought back if shows necesary. Tone 22:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marc Mezvinsky[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable, per WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:BIO#Invalid criteria. Known only for being someone's son and someone's fiancé. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 11:09, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Merge At best, this should be merged with Chelsea Clinton (as that is all he is truly notable for), as he is her fiance. Otherwise, he is not notable by association. Angryapathy (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, or merge per Angryapathy. Notability is not inherited, and we have very little information about Marc, so the article is destined to be a WP:COATRACK about his family. ~YellowFives 16:07, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Notability is not inherited. Joe Chill (talk) 02:22, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chelsea Clinton. This is a likely search term but not a good article subject; thus a redirect is appropriate. Chick Bowen 17:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. ^Izzedine 04:06, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Chelsea Clinton per Chick Bowen. JBsupreme (talk) 06:45, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I feel that anyone that makes it to headline news is notable and an article about him/her adds value to WP. Jonniefast (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:23, 5 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Weak keep or Merge Deleting doesn't make much sense to me, as he is likely to be searched often Vartanza (talk) 03:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
'" Keep"': He's going to be searched often, it's worth it to keep the page. Not every page needs to be a behemoth of an article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.65.245.91 (talk) 02:36, 8 December 2009 (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.