Deletion of Sir Cecil Bisshopp, 10th Baronet (2nd nomination)

Comment: Let me restate what I said in 2013. The article's subject was a clergyman born of the gentry who died under 30. He was apparently well-liked by his peers, enough to justify a wordy encomium in ''The Gentleman's Magazine'' on his death. That's it. There's no |significant coverage. Plenty of people looked in 2013 and came up empty. Barring the introduction of new sources this article will never be more than genealogical stub: he was born, he took holy orders, he died. Whatever the attitude was in the mid-Victorian era, modern scholarship doesn't appear to have taken any notice of this man
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV)

Comment: Jahaza makes a good point, redirect to Bishopp baronets would be  to readers
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL)

Comment: WP:CHEAP|is fine - there's |no real independent notability
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)