Deletion of Sir Edward Threston

Comment: Whilst I heartily endorse keeping someone who's been knighted in the modern era under , since knighthood is awarded for achievement, I really don't think we can extend that to medieval knights, who were usually knighted as teenagers because their father was also a knight and not for any especial distinction. Essentially, they were equivalent to baronets (hereditary knights) today; the first to receive the honour is inherently notable, but his successors aren't. Threston wouldn't have been knighted because he was a Knight Templar, as the article says; he would have become a Knight Templar ''because'' he was knighted (lesser individuals joined the order as brother sergeants). There's no evidence he was especially notable
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: I'm not sure that  is so broad as to encompass every member of the Knights Templar. Membership in the Knights Templar was not a reward of honor (as modern knighthoods), but rather a reward for the wealth required to join
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill (WP:MILL)