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.
These are somewhat morbid examples of
genealogical entries. The subjects were the children of public figures who died in an accident aged 4 and 6, respectively. There is no significant coverage as required by
WP:BASIC and
WP:GNG nor can there realistically be any: they are known exclusively for the accident (
WP:BLP1E) and their relationship to adult figures (
WP:INVALIDBIO). The content of the articles is identical, and they are also very similar to the
recently deleted article about their likewise short-lived sister. All the information about their lives and deaths are already found in the articles about their parents, who died with them, and that should suffice.
Surtsicna (
talk)
14:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—
cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online19:37, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Cyberpower678:: The AfD can be processed as normal (it will be discussed by Wikipedians, and maybe the article will be deleted by an admin), as it is correctly transcluded onto the daily log page. I assume your message means it can't be automatically added to
User:Cyberbot I/Current AfD's, but that is not a core function of AfD, and not a good reason to put a warning message here that could be read as "this AfD won't be closed and the article won't be deleted unless the header is edited in certain ways". Could you amend your message please? Thank you, —Kusma (
t·
c)
20:27, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, main claim of notability is involvement in the plane crash, and their unnamed newborn sibling seems to have a more prominent role in that. —Kusma (
t·
c)
20:35, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep - As of
Prince Ludwig of Hesse and by Rhine his notability is mentioned in the article "He was the first great-great-great-grandchild of Queen Victoria". Only one person can be this, and as it is it happens to be Prince Ludwig of Hesse and by Rhine. And for this nomination in general it's improper, since it suggests "The content of the articles is identical" which they are not. Therefore this is from the beginning a biased and improper nomination.
Oleryhlolsson (
talk)
04:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)reply
That's just genealogical trivia. He has not received significant coverage for being anyone's "first great-great-great-grandchild".
Surtsicna (
talk)
11:19, 15 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete: The nom covered this very well. The topic fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BASIC. There are no reliable sources independent of the subject that cover anything directly and indepth about this individual because they have done absolutely nothing notable. Being related to a public figure is not notable
WP:INVALIDBIOWP:NOTINHERITED. Wikipedia is
WP:NOTGENEALOGY of non-notable members in royal families. Â Â //Â
Timothy :: talk 04:59, 15 August 2020 (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.
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.
These are somewhat morbid examples of
genealogical entries. The subjects were the children of public figures who died in an accident aged 4 and 6, respectively. There is no significant coverage as required by
WP:BASIC and
WP:GNG nor can there realistically be any: they are known exclusively for the accident (
WP:BLP1E) and their relationship to adult figures (
WP:INVALIDBIO). The content of the articles is identical, and they are also very similar to the
recently deleted article about their likewise short-lived sister. All the information about their lives and deaths are already found in the articles about their parents, who died with them, and that should suffice.
Surtsicna (
talk)
14:12, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—
cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online19:37, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Cyberpower678:: The AfD can be processed as normal (it will be discussed by Wikipedians, and maybe the article will be deleted by an admin), as it is correctly transcluded onto the daily log page. I assume your message means it can't be automatically added to
User:Cyberbot I/Current AfD's, but that is not a core function of AfD, and not a good reason to put a warning message here that could be read as "this AfD won't be closed and the article won't be deleted unless the header is edited in certain ways". Could you amend your message please? Thank you, —Kusma (
t·
c)
20:27, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, main claim of notability is involvement in the plane crash, and their unnamed newborn sibling seems to have a more prominent role in that. —Kusma (
t·
c)
20:35, 13 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep - As of
Prince Ludwig of Hesse and by Rhine his notability is mentioned in the article "He was the first great-great-great-grandchild of Queen Victoria". Only one person can be this, and as it is it happens to be Prince Ludwig of Hesse and by Rhine. And for this nomination in general it's improper, since it suggests "The content of the articles is identical" which they are not. Therefore this is from the beginning a biased and improper nomination.
Oleryhlolsson (
talk)
04:06, 15 August 2020 (UTC)reply
That's just genealogical trivia. He has not received significant coverage for being anyone's "first great-great-great-grandchild".
Surtsicna (
talk)
11:19, 15 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete: The nom covered this very well. The topic fails
WP:GNG and
WP:BASIC. There are no reliable sources independent of the subject that cover anything directly and indepth about this individual because they have done absolutely nothing notable. Being related to a public figure is not notable
WP:INVALIDBIOWP:NOTINHERITED. Wikipedia is
WP:NOTGENEALOGY of non-notable members in royal families. Â Â //Â
Timothy :: talk 04:59, 15 August 2020 (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.