Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archduchess Maria Beatrix of Austria-Este

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. The "keep" opinions do not address the lack of sources, which dooms any topic, noble or not. Sandstein 20:46, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Archduchess Maria Beatrix of Austria-Este

[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)

This article had two sources, both unreliable. Google finds 62 hits for the article title quoted, mostly namechecks. I don't know if even the title is correct, and it's hard to tell because of the tendency of noble houses to reuse names. Maria Beatrix countess of Montizon gets 43 unique hits. I just don't think this is an independently notable subject. Guy (help!) 15:20, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wikipedia is not a royal geneology website. We do not keep articles on people whose only claim to fame is connections with not in power claimants and displaced royal houses.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:13, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's not the best article title. It's ambiguous with her grandmother (and great-grandmother) Maria Beatrice d'Este, Duchess of Massa, and should probably be a redirect there. DrKay (talk) 09:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non notable person. Smeat75 (talk) 14:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep John Pack Lambert’s comment is completely wrong. During her life the Habsburg’s ruled Austria-Hungry, her father was the ruling Duke of Modena so she is not some non notable modern day descendant of a displaced not in power royal house, but instead someone at the heart of the Carlist Wars as a wife and mother of claimants. The other language Wikipedia’s have better sourced and written articles that can be used to improve this one. - dwc lr (talk) 14:58, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but needs improvement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:4360:AD9A:53FC:71F1:A392 (talk) 19:15, 9 June 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.