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/redirect per WP:SNOW. The standard on Wikipedia is that minor children of notable people do not merit an article unless they meet notability guidelines and are independently notable outside of their parents. This usually means that the child has received coverage for being something other than the child of a famous person, like a notable child actor. The only exception to this would be if the child was born into nobility and is of a particularly high status, such as Prince George or Princess Charlotte of Cambridge. Barron Trump does not satisfy this criteria as he has only received coverage for being Trump's son and his appearances on various media was in a "son of" capacity. The BLP issue here is also strong, for reasons listed below and at WP:MINORS. (This is an essay, but is largely considered law on Wikipedia when it comes to minors.) I have no opinion on whether or not a "Family of Donald Trump" article would be appropriate or not, so this is something that should be discussed at Talk:Donald Trump - either way, the consensus on whether Barron deserves an individual article is very clear so there's no need to drag this out for a full week. I will leave the history intact so that if a page for the Trump family is created, there will be history to pull from. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:45, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Barron Trump[edit]

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

We normally don't keep articles on underaged children of politicians or famous people. Earlier today, this article was expanded from a redirect (to daddy). Should either be deleted outright, redirected back to Daddy, or merged and redirected to an article that encompasses the entire clan. p b p 00:49, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified interested parties at Talk:Donald Trump, and have suggested the possibility of a Trump family article. p b p 00:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No notability independent of his parents' celebrity. Vesuvius Dogg (talk) 00:59, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is not an appropriate article until Barron Trump can pass WP:GNG as the subject of articles (rather than as a footnote in articles).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:25, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The sources cover Barron as a subject in and of himself, as indicated by the source headlines. We cover celebrity/political children all the time. The prime example is probably Patrick Bouvier Kennedy, who lived for a whole two days. --OpusDayNotDei (talk) 01:51, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

He's dead, no BLP concerns.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 12:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not appropriate as a stand alone article, there's nothing notable on its own here. Rjhatl (talk) 03:22, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Definitely a candidate for deletion. Besides being non-notable in this case, generally speaking underage children of prominent figures and celebrities should be considered off limits. This, for a number of reasons, including privacy concerns -- which is why there are not separate articles on Malia and Sasha Obama, for example (even though they are photographed at numerous public events, which seems to be Barron Trump's primary claim to fame) but they are included in the Family of Barack Obama article. (For my part, I'm not even sure Wikipedia should include the 'Family of' articles, but just should list underage children on the principal person's article page). --- Professor JR (talk) 10:10, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Although I would note I did like a thought raised earlier of creating an article titled "Trump Family" and merging some of the more notable material in here. Immortal Horrors or Everlasting Splendors 11:29, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Our de facto rule for a number of years has been for minor children for whom notability is wholly dependent on a notable parent to not have a separate article. I fought the Malia and Sasha determinations at the time, but have come to see it is a wise decision, and it certainly should apply here, where Trump is merely a candidate.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 12:44, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Propose IAR Speedy Close. Trump's article is very highly trafficked, it has been in the WP:TOP25 every week for two months now.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 12:45, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Milowent:: We could just speedy redirect it back to daddy. Wouldn't even need an admin to do it. p b p 13:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I would support you in doing that. We may get some flack, but its plainly the right move.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 13:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:18, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability is not inherited. Most of the sources cover him only in relation to his famous daddy. He probably will be notable in ~15/20 years or so, but not at the moment. ~EDDY ^{(talk/contribs)}~ 14:53, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect This was a redirect before; it should be restored. Agree with all delete voters that notability is not inherited, etc. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect As the editor who originally put the redirect in nine years ago, it should be restored. This child has done nothing public apart from appearing on his father's TV show as a toddler. While I commend his parents' restraint in keeping him out of the spotlight in this famewhore age (I'm looking at you, Kardashians), the fact remains that he does not deserve his own article at this time. -- Raider Duck (talk) 22:55, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Restore to redirect per Mubogohu's points: I also agree that notability is not uninherited. --Rubbish computer 23:50, 24 September 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.