Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pontifex (British family)

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 Userfy. MBisanz ^talk 20:47, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pontifex (British family)

Submitted for AFD by article's creator as I am not sure if the article qualifies as WP:NOTABLE, but I would like to have it voted by my fellow Wikipedians rather than worry about a possible speedy deletion. Thank you for your attention. [email protected] (talk) 22:19, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Possibly the article should be moved to User space for the moment and then the individual members of the family might be considered for articles. I suppose a useful rule of thumb on whether to have an article on a family rather than (or in addition to) individual articles on the individual members of a family would be to consider if there is a need to refer to the family as a unit, rather than to individual members; more often than not there isn't a need for family-based articles. I (and this is just my opinion) don't see a need in this case as there isn't any obvious way that the family could be seen to be acting as a unit, rather than as individuals, from what I could find. That said, some of the members of the family might be notable. In particular, Roy Mark Pontifex, more often referred to as Dom Mark Pontifex was, from what I can gather from a quick search, a theologian of note with a Thomist bent. That comment should have the obvious proviso that Googling early-to-mid 20th Century theologians isn't going to be the most profitable of exercises. There might be a case for other members of the family, again with the proviso that relying on Google rather than paper sources isn't necessarily going to be the best way of approaching the subject. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:35, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, at least. May need to fork into separate articles, but a quick search suggsts that several of the Pontifexes are notable, maybe more than several (does one say pontifexes? I fear the plural may be Pontifeces, but that's rather troubling...) - Vartanza (talk) 03:51, 16 June 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:36, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the plural would be pontifices...which is better. TheFeds 01:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to agree with TheFeds on this point, but must point out that "Pontifeces" would not be troubling in British English - for that to be the case it would have to be "Pontifaeces". Phil Bridger (talk) 16:34, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Split into articles about the individuals who meet the notability rules on their own. Then consider a rewrite into an article on the name Pontifex (but not necessarily this particular family, see Smith (surname), or Clinton), or alternatively, if the family is appropriately notable, rewrite into an article on the family acting as a unit (per Flowerpotman). TheFeds 01:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:16, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 02:01, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wholly unsourced. Should be userfied upon request, but this material isn't encyclopedic and doesn't meet our notability criteria. ChildofMidnight (talk) 05:41, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice to recreating individual articles should individual members be notable. I don't like the idea of increasing people's claims to notability based on who their relatives are. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 07:23, 20 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh, and if the individual articles do meet notability, there's no reason why you couldn't add a single-line entry per person to Pontifex (disambiguation).
Convert to a user page (if creator so wishes). A few of the people listed probably qualify as notable (eg the one with a Times Obituary), but they need separate articles and Pontifex (surname), which should give the origon of the name and list notable persons bearing it, that is those with articles or notable enough to require them. Abbots, and Brigadiers should qualify. Pontifex (surname) will need to be listed on Pontifex (disambiguation). Peterkingiron (talk) 16:15, 20 June 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.