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. Unopposed nomination. Can be restored if more relevant sources are found.  Sandstein  19:22, 16 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Sir Philip Grey Egerton, 11th Baronet

Sir Philip Grey Egerton, 11th Baronet (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't see any reason for notability. Didn't receive the baronetcy himself (for those who may be in doubt, a baronet is not a peer, doesn't sit in the House of Lords, and therefore does not qualify under WP:POLITICIAN). Or indeed any other honours. A mid-ranking military officer. And a Deputy Lieutenant doesn't qualify either - it's just an honorary position. Just a genealogical article. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 13:05, 23 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 12:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp ( talk) 12:59, 23 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:57, 23 September 2015 (UTC) reply

• Uncertain as others may be more familiar with this but I would also think this is a historic and interesting subject. SwisterTwister talk 07:13, 27 September 2015 (UTC) reply
• (With some regret) Delete, or rather redirect to Grey Egerton baronets, delinking the article there -- Neither being a major, not DL, nor owning a substantial landed estate (which Oulton Park is (or was) is sufficient: clearly NN. There do not seem to be any links to later generations of the family that will be upset by this. Peterkingiron ( talk) 16:47, 27 September 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 23:52, 5 October 2015 (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.