Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Désirée of Hohenzollern

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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Killiondude (talk) 07:48, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Désirée of Hohenzollern

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

Citing guidelines WP:INVALIDBIO & WP:BIOFAMILY & WP:NOTGENEALOGY; no indication of importance = I tried WP:A7 Db-person, but that was speedily removed with summary "being a princess an indication of notability", however the use of courtesy titles with no genuine validity, i.e. from old monarchies abolished in ~~1918~~ 1919, and having had such anacronistic titles added to one's name, not as titles but as names as per German law, does not make one an actual princess; the article's only sources are genealogy blogs. The status of these names (as names, not as titles) is clarified under German nobility: "All legal privileges and immunities of the royalty and nobility (appertaining to an individual, a family or any heirs) were officially abolished in 1919 by the Weimar Republic (1919–1933), and nobility is no longer conferred or recognized by the Federal Republic of Germany. Former hereditary titles are permitted as part of the surname." --SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:48, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS Even a failed proposal such as Wikipedia:Notability (royalty), which was intended to automatically include many formerly royal people as notable, did not infer that articles like this be OK ("Other close relations of formerly reigning royal families must qualify under WP:BIO."). --SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:58, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no evidence of independent notability. —Kusma (t·c) 10:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, suggest to the nominator that before nominating articles for A7 in the future, they actually read the rules for that criteria. The article does not need to meet our notability guidelines to be ineligible for speedy deletion, only some form of importance needs to be asserted, which it is here. Hopefully this helps to avoid confusion in the future. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:44, 4 February 2018 (UTC).[reply]

I still believe, as motivated above, that there is "no indication of importance" and thus that WP:A7 would have been applicable here. I also believe that we should comment on content, not on contributors. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 08:20, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:48, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:48, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Hhhhhkohhhhh (talk) 06:48, 6 February 2018 (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.