Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Einstein

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 Delete. Tim Vickers (talk) 21:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Einstein

Notability is not inherited, and there's no indication of any notability here other than his famous great-grandpa. Several other articles in Category:Einstein Family probably need looking at here for similar reasons. Grutness...wha? 01:28, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article does not imply any notability for the subject other than being a relative of someone notable. A Google search brings up no promising leads that the subject's notability can be verified by reliable sources. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 02:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Neither article, nor sources, nor google return anything particularly notable about this person beyond his ancestry. Grandmartin11 (talk) 04:38, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - also can't find anything notable other than that he does his job. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 05:27, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not asserting notability in his profession. As above; notability is not inherited. one brave monkey 10:07, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Being related to someone notable does not make a person notable. Schuym1 (talk) 15:53, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
UnDelete: The reason why I created this article was because I thought people might be interested in tracking descendants of Albert Einstein. The article does come under the Category:Einstein Familycategory. If Einsten's son (s) and sister can qualify to have their own articles why not the great grandson? However if the majority decides to delete it, I won't have any problems with that. p.s. The article is a stub.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahak library (talk • contribs)

- Please note my comment on nomination that several of the other articles in this category also need examining for possible deletion - none of these pages indicates much in the way of independent notability. In any case, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good argument for keeping a page. Even if it was, a great-grandson is significantly further removed than a son or a sister. Grutness...wha? 00:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:04, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 16:18, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Notability not asserted apart from having decended from an Einstein. JFW | T@lk 06:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A special case of the "notability is not inherited" rule, applied very literally. It's possible that a single article on Einstein's family could meet the notability guidelines, but most of the individuals will not. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:20, 27 October 2008 (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.