- 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. Salvio 15:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Princess Christine of Orléans-Braganza
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Princess Christine of Orléans-Braganza ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I see no indication of notability, i.e. no significant coverage in reliable sources. She does not appear to have had a significant role in promoting the monarchist cause in Brazil or any other role, judging by the lack of any reports thereof. We should not have articles that amount to nothing more than genealogical entries. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete non notable -- Devokewater @ 11:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and the other comment above. Smeat75 ( talk) 17:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete and redirect to father's article, unless/until it too is deleted. No independent notability, but worth a redirect (plus redirects from other names). Pam D 10:10, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete being a member of a royal house is not a default sign of notability. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 16:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep because she was a member of a reigning royal family, not just married into one, and not merely a deposed monarch's child. Her article also ties together several others. Bearian ( talk) 01:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete consists entirely of genealogical information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.110.217.186 ( talk) 13:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete because she lacks the notability to be notable (shrug emoji). Plus, the article is just a basic listing and can't be expanded due to the lack of reliable in-depth secondary sources about her. So, there's really nothing worth having an article on her for. -- Adamant1 ( talk) 08:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- 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.
The result was delete. Salvio 15:50, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
Princess Christine of Orléans-Braganza
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Princess Christine of Orléans-Braganza ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I see no indication of notability, i.e. no significant coverage in reliable sources. She does not appear to have had a significant role in promoting the monarchist cause in Brazil or any other role, judging by the lack of any reports thereof. We should not have articles that amount to nothing more than genealogical entries. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna ( talk) 11:35, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete non notable -- Devokewater @ 11:55, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and the other comment above. Smeat75 ( talk) 17:11, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete and redirect to father's article, unless/until it too is deleted. No independent notability, but worth a redirect (plus redirects from other names). Pam D 10:10, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete being a member of a royal house is not a default sign of notability. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 16:08, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
- Keep because she was a member of a reigning royal family, not just married into one, and not merely a deposed monarch's child. Her article also ties together several others. Bearian ( talk) 01:34, 7 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete consists entirely of genealogical information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.110.217.186 ( talk) 13:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
- Delete because she lacks the notability to be notable (shrug emoji). Plus, the article is just a basic listing and can't be expanded due to the lack of reliable in-depth secondary sources about her. So, there's really nothing worth having an article on her for. -- Adamant1 ( talk) 08:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
- 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.