Roger Clinton Sr. : For example, all of the sources in the article right now are either presidential-focused or are Bill's autobiography.  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America .  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:55, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Nominator is right in that notability is not inherited , GNG says People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.  The article cites numerous reliable secondary sources in  its content.  estar8806 ( talk ) ★ 02:13, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Estar8806 : The argument is that the secondary sources provided don't include significant coverage of the subject.  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No, but WP:Notability (people) says If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability , which I believe is the case here.  estar8806 ( talk ) ★ 15:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Presidential families tend to be exceptions to the rules of notability.   i.e. grocer and gas station owner Francis A. Nixon , father of Richard Nixon.  Gerald Ford's father Leslie Lynch King Sr.  , Ronald Reagan's traveling salesman father Jack Reagan , etc. etc.  — Maile ( talk ) 04:17, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi Maile66 , it's been awhile—I hope you're well.  :-) I'd be remiss if I didn't point point out that OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is considered an argument to avoid in deletion conversations.  Perhaps those other articles should also be examined.  Are there any significant secondary sources available that discuss Roger Clinton Sr. in depth and his own right?  Wasn't Reagan's father also a politician?  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The ed17 It's not a matter of Other Stuff Exists, but more that Presidential families as a whole are handled differently.  Dorothy Ayer Gardner Ford for instance, has no accomplishments by Wikipedia standards.   She was just Gerald Ford's mother.  Got married a couple of times.  Nancy Lincoln has no claim to accomplishment except to give birth to Abraham Lincoln.  And so it goes.  — Maile ( talk ) 12:28, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: I don't think it is as simple as you are making out to be, that presidential families tend to be exceptions to the rules of notability.  For instance, Finnegan Biden just had her article deleted not too long ago.  Even if that was the case, it would still go against the concept that notability is not inherited.  Let'srun ( talk ) 03:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above comments, a major figure in the life of an American president.  The nominator is making many of these type of good faith edits, and I just had to resurrect Ike's older brother after his page had been made into a redirect.  The ed17 , please do not plow through American president's families as you seem to be doing with deletions and tags, thanks.  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 04:54, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Randy Kryn : please feel free to visit my talk page if you have concerns about other edits I've made!  Do you know of any significant secondary sources available that discuss Roger Clinton Sr. in depth and his own right?  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:06, 3 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Now I've returned Warren G. Harding's daughters page that you've deleted without discussion, one which was kept in a 2017 AfD .  Please stop doing these deletions to presidential relative articles, thanks.  Your talk page not neccessary, just Afd pages you don't like or, better yet, rehab the articles.  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 02:49, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Clinton family .  I don't think his relationship with a young Bill should exempt him from standard notability standards, but even if that would contribute to his inclusion here, I'd suggest this should be covered in the main article per WP:NOPAGE .  The same goes for Jeff Dwire , if not more strongly.  Reywas92 Talk 16:59, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arkansas-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:47, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  It may be true that this article doesn't show the notability that we expect from other biographies.  But I also don't see any support for deleting this article except from the nominator so I'm relisting this discussion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  04:37, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I believe notability is clearly established.  As an aside, I am glad to see this article come up temporarily reinstated to allow  for a proper discussion as to whether or not it is deleted.  The very fact that the nominee, an administrator, Ed17 deleted it without even allowing a discussion was the very reason why I made the decision in June to retire from Wikipedia.  So at least my faith has been restored by Estar8806 who called it out.  I hope the article is kept but for me, I am out of here after 15+ years over because of this.  Coldupnorth ( talk ) 12:13, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Coldupnorth , jeez, you really did mean that you retired because of this The ed17 deletion [see CuN's user page). Hopefully you only take a break and come back as strong as ever. The nominator deleted a number of articles of notable presidential relatives which were rescued (thank heaven and Sanger for watchlists and contribution history pages). The admin should, of course, voluntarily refrain from taking it upon themselves to unilaterally remove any further articles (mainly because it has been shown in a number of recent RfD's that their judgement about these pages may be incorrect) but your presence on Wikipedia, and on this RfD, shows your value to the project. Stay warm, up north, Coldupnorth, and please come back now and then. Randy Kryn ( talk ) 12:45, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Coldupnorth : I'm sorry to hear that my actions affected you in that way.  But as you have to know, you could have opened a discussion on my talk page, asked for a third opinion, or taken any number of other actions should you have so chosen...  Wikipedia's fundamental ethos is in discussions between editors who disagree and come to a consensus decision.  @ Randy Kryn : Give it a rest.  I've nominated a few articles for deletion, and as it turns out consensus on them is at best divided ( example 1 , example 2 ).  Moreover, you haven't helped these discussions with frequent posts that are rarely based in Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.  Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:35, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The ed17 , I didn't know about either of those nominations.  What I was talking about was your removal of articles without discussion, just gone.  There your recent record isn't so good.  If I knew about Andrew Johnson's dad maybe I would have commented, I don't look at the list of deletion attempts, there are so many daily.  It's a dark corner of Wikipedia, and often only ventured into when something pops up on my watchlist.  Maybe just leave presidential relatives alone?  By the way, Adali Stevenson wasn't a U.S. president, so his grandson wasn't in that realm and I know nothing about him.  Met his dad though, the IIIrd, and knew several people who worked closely with him on a project.  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 22:21, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] People leave wikipedia for all sorts of reasons, I was reading the retirement comment on Coldupnorth's page and concluded "The ed17" must be 17 years old, and then remembered I've worked with/around Ed on stuff like 10 years ago, and slashed a decade off my own age due to this exciting discovery of reverse aging.   No matter what we do with these presidential relations articles, please no one burst that bubble for me.-- Milowent • has spoken 19:01, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep :  Essentially I agree with the points Maile makes, its a very common carryover for an American president to generate enough coverage to support articles on key family members.  Thus, we've had this article for 16 years.-- Milowent • has spoken 14:42, 15 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: keep