Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andreas, Prince of Leiningen

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. A redirect can be re-created if desired. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:42, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Andreas, Prince of Leiningen

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Mostly standard genealogical information, nobility in Germany was abolished at end of WW1, his family looks a bit obscure even before then. PatGallacher (talk) 21:26, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:47, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, textbook example of WP:NOTINHERITED. The "title" he inherited has been abolished more than 100 years ago, and his family hasn't had a territory to rule for more than 200 years. Article has essentially no content specific to the person. —Kusma (t·c) 22:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is the extreme in deposed monarchy cruft.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The article is mainly a genealogical record with zero notability of its own. The principality of Leiningen was annexed under the German Empire and the House of Leiningen was mainly a cadet level subsidiary of the Houses of Wittelsbach and Hohenzollern, leaving the title with very little significance on its own. TheRedDomitor (talk) 10:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Which is an assessment of what the title meant 110 years ago, and has no relevance to its utter meaninglessness today.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:47, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know that, which is exactly why I have voted for deletion. TheRedDomitor (talk) 03:43, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to his father's article or another appropriate target, per my essay here. Bearian (talk) 16:23, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and the other comments above. Smeat75 (talk) 21:19, 10 September 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.