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 redirect to David_Petraeus#Personal_life. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Petraeus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Although his father is a notable general, notability is not inherited and there are no assertions of notability besides for his father. --v/r Electric Catfish (talk) 15:57, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While it is correct that notability is not inherited, I believe he is still notable given the fact that his father mentioned him explicitly in a Congressional hearing during a discussion on Afghanistan. Furthermore, I provided several sources which show media interest in Stephen Petraeus, though I admit the article needs improvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Kolvenbach (talk • contribs) 16:12, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or possibly redirect to David Petraeus, where a couple of sourced sentences already exist about Stephen. I don't see any indication that he is separately notable in the Wikipedia sense.--Arxiloxos (talk) 21:02, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:37, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Absolutely no reason for this individual to have an article. Being mentioned a couple of times in the media because your father is famous (or even being mentioned in a public hearing by your famous father) does not equate to notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Mentions by his father or pictures taken of him by the media with his father does not make Stephen notable. Though widely covered it is little more than trivial coverage that does not address Stephen in detail so he fails WP:GNG. EricSerge (talk) 15:13, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:BLP given that this is a living person with no specific grounds for being considered notability. Nick-D (talk) 23:01, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:BLP; US-cruft. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:27, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as it fails WP:SIGCOV and does not meet BLP criteria. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 19:39, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or merge to parent article as sources exist. K7L (talk) 19:25, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per past outcomes; see, e.g., Roderick Wetherill, Jr.. We have almost always merged miltary sons' articles into their more notable fathers' articles. I can't see why this should be treated any differently. If anyone has a better argument for outright deletion, in light of past precedent, please come forth now. Bearian (talk) 19:20, 16 October 2012 (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.