Talk:Nicholas Knatchbull

Latest comment: 14 years ago by One Night In Hackney in topic Proposed merge

Proposed merge

edit

There is noting of note here that could not be contained within the Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma article. Anyone agree/disagree?--Vintagekits 16:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

There are separate articles for other relatively minor royals. I don't see any real reason why this one shouldn't have a separate article as well. His death is certainly notable, as is his status as a relative of the royal family. --Bookworm857158367 18:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
He is not notable himself according to WP:N and everything is contained within this article is already contained within the Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma article so there is no need for this one.--Vintagekits 18:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
In light of the many dreary articles established by yourself with reference to terrorists I think they prove that, as they are notable, the decent, innocent, victims of terrorism - especially when high-profile, are also notable. Quid pro quo and all that.--Counter-revolutionary 18:30, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
P.s the murders of Prince Louis & his family was not one, singular, murder; it was individuals who died, this requires individual articles.--Counter-revolutionary 18:34, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Firstly as per usual watch your tone please! Secondly, you are actually incorrect I could have resurect the Declan Arthurs article, the Gerry O'Callaghan article, the Séamus Donnelly articles which were merged to the Provisional IRA East Tyrone Brigade and I felt that as that article provided all the information already then there was no need to have them. Actually this article should be deleted and Nicholas Knatchbull should be a redirected to Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma.--Vintagekits 18:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
No it shouldn't. At the very worst there should be a separate arcticle for the incident, "The Massacre of the Mountbattens". --Counter-revolutionary 18:51, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
The whole article is almost word for word in the "Death" section of the Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma - what is there is this article that isnt in the Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma article? --Vintagekits 18:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

He isn't the same person as his grand-father, an article about the incident is required and a title suggested above.--Counter-revolutionary 18:58, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Well good luck with that article yeah. However, this person isnt notable and should be merged or redirected.--Vintagekits 19:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
Right if you finally disagree with its merger then I am going to nominate it for deletion ok.--Vintagekits 23:47, 24 April 2007 (UTC)Reply
The article says nothing about the poor child, except naming his relatives and stating when he died. I think that deletion is in order. His surviving brother, the Honorable Timothy Knatchbull,... now, has he done anything with his life that warrants an article? --Amandajm 08:23, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Wikipedia seems to have set a precedent that people can become notable by virtue of dying. See the countless articles created and/or contributed to by User:Vintagekits on IRA terrorists, for instance. --Counter-revolutionary 09:31, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I propose a merge to his father's article, this article contains little or no biographical information that is not in that article already. 2 lines of K303 13:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Reply

I agree, there is nothing of note within this article that is not already contained within the Mountabatten article.Ghandi's Flip-flop303 13:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Nah, I'm not proposing merging him to Dan's article, as that's a bit of an unnatural merge target. I'm proposing a merge to his father's article - John Knatchbull, 7th Baron Brabourne, where in fact all the relevant information already is! 2 lines of K303 12:58, 6 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Sounds good - craic on! .Felchingmania XIIor not 13:30, 6 August 2009 (UTC)Reply
Last call for any objections? 2 lines of K303 13:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)Reply