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 Merge as this seems clear enough to close and history is still archived so it's mergeable if needed later (NAC). SwisterTwister talk 03:37, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Waring Darwin (infant) (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)

Fails WP:GNG, notability mostly derived from his father The Banner talk 23:53, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Vipinhari || talk 04:46, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Vipinhari || talk 04:46, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I found a chapter of this book (published by Oxford University Press) dedicated to the subject. Mhhossein (talk) 08:18, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The relevance to Darwin's writings is notable. Could it be merged with Darwin's page? Chris vLS (talk) 04:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. There are sources. Also, the article potentially covers the coincidences and connections between the infant being born and dying at Down House, the infant being son of Charles Darwin who described evolution (requires genetics), the child's Down syndrome being a genetic disease, and the Down for whom Down's syndrome is named being a relative, John Langdon Down (one of whose sisters married into the Darwin family). That Charles Darwin had this son, and that it affected his thinking about evolution, is highly significant. And that Darwin himself advised against consanguinity (e.g. marrying a first cousin, as he had done), based on his developed knowledge of genetics/evolution and his having had this son. It would burden the very important Charles Darwin article to go into these conspiracy-theory-like relationships. --doncram 16:51, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Longish quote from Steensma source:

Much later, Charles Darwin Sr—ever attentive to the workings of biological principles in his own family—worried about to what extent the fact that he and Emma were first cousins had predisposed his deceased children to their illnesses. He publicly advocated collecting such data as part of the British National Census for 1871, a suggestion that was rejected because of concerns over privacy.1(p230) There was growing awareness in the late 19th century that “inbreeding” contributed to the development of certain ailments. Darwin had proposed natural selection as the mechanism of evolution, but he had no mechanistic insights into the potential problems of consanguinity, because the rediscovery of Mendel's work had not yet occurred and there was no clear concept of genetics. If Annie Darwin died of tuberculosis and Charles Waring had Down syndrome, these illnesses indeed started “at home,” but not for the reasons Darwin envisioned. There is no evidence that consanguineous partnerships predispose to either condition.

The tremendous advances in cellular and molecular biology in the century and a half since the publication of Origin of Species have highlighted the analogy between the development of cancer clones and the evolution of new species. Only very recently has it been demonstrated that one of the clearest examples involves GATA1 mutations arising in infants with the very illness that likely afflicted the great naturalist's youngest son. What would Darwin have thought?

I think this is worth explicating in the encyclopedia and the appropriate place is this separate article. --doncram 17:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And what did baby Darwin do to reach notability? As far as I know, notability is not inherited but this article derives its notability from daddy Charles Darwin. The Banner talk 22:19, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge - Redirect to Charles Darwin#Children. This infant is already mentioned there, but a sentence or two could be added. --MelanieN (talk) 00:53, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge Only notable through other Darwins. Anmccaff (talk) 01:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge As not being notable on his own. It's interesting, though. MelanieLamont (talk) 17:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge, the mite deserves a paragraph and a redirect, but not an article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:48, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge - Redirect per ChiswickChap. Blythwood (talk) 08:34, 22 March 2016 (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.