Deletion of Tim Mathieson

Comment: I'd just like to reiterate that  specifically states that the first lady/first man of a country is considered notable
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: having read every comment on this page, and  which states: "Note, however, that this does not apply to situations where the fact of having a relationship to another person inherently defines a public position that is notable in its own right, such as a national First Lady." He is a figure of clear public interest in Australia, and possible the rest of the world
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: I think that there's been sufficient coverage of Mathieson over the last few years to get him across the  threshold, albeit not by much
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BIO)

Comment: per  and . The previous spouses have articles because charity and other such work comes as par for the course as First Lady and they became very notable (especially Hazel Hawke) in those roles. Therese Rein, Margaret Whitlam and Lady Sonia McMahon were independently notable even without the first lady status
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:BIO)

Comment: Notable as Australia's first male partner of a head of government. The coverage in reliable sources is more than significant: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/julia-gillards-partner-faces-life-in-the-limelight/story-e6frg6nf-1225884482420, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/7854855/Julia-Gillard-Australia-gets-to-know-its-new-First-Bloke.html, including being appointed as a "men's health ambassador" by the Commonwealth Government http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifestyle/news/julias-man-more-than-a-handbag/story-e6frf00r-1111118137859. So he meets the GNG in spades. "Notability is not inherited", which comes from an |essay not any formal guidance let alone policy, gets a little silly when we start deleting articles about people who are the subject of international news articles
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Perhaps waiting a few days before nominating this article would have been a good idea. Consider: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/julia-gillards-partner-faces-life-in-the-limelight/story-e6frg6nf-1225884482420 The Australian, http://www.smh.com.au/national/light-shines-on-rising-star-20100625-z9rx.html The Sydney Morning Herald, http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/salon-romance-now-a-national-affair/story-e6frf7jo-1225884003554 The Herald Sun, and even the UK http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/australiaandthepacific/australia/7854855/Julia-Gillard-Australia-gets-to-know-its-new-First-Bloke.html Telegraph, all running profile pieces on him which have him well above the |general notability guideline, |inherited or not
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Clearly passes ; has been the subject of numerous reports already, and is certain to be the subject of even more in the future (and that's not , that's 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:CRYSTAL||WP:COMMONSENSE)

Comment: It doesn't matter why people are notable - they are all grist to our mill.  To exclude material on opinionated grounds would not be |neutral
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: I know that , but we have articles on other Prime Ministerial spouses like Annita van Iersel who are more low-profile than Mathieson, and their existance does not seem to be particularly controversial.  Given that Mathieson is the first male to find himself in that position, I also think that the existing volume of coverage on him can only increase
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)