Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Luitpold of Bavaria (b. 1951)

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 02:05, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Luitpold of Bavaria (b. 1951)

[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)

Membership of former royal family does not confer notability, his business activities don't seem to amount to very much. PatGallacher (talk) 19:07, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Roller26 (talk) 19:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Roller26 (talk) 19:17, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think he is the leader of the House of Wittelsbach, and the only son of the last reigning prince of Bavaria, I would think that makes him notable. Deathlibrarian (talk) 05:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Sufficient coverage in independent reliable sources to establish notability. Major German newspapers and magazine published his about as the head of the House of Wittelsbach, and business career The European, Abendzeitung München, Kreisbote, Main-Post, The Economic Times, Exklusiv München and many other [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. VocalIndia (talk) 05:39, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per VocalIndia. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 11:52, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources identified by VocalIndia. It appears they still joust at Schloss Kaltenberg. [9] --Eostrix (^{🦉 hoot} _hoot🦉) 11:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets WP:GNG and WP:BASIC, per VocalIndia's sources. Ejgreen77 (talk) 06:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as shown by VocalIndia easily passes GNG. - dwc lr (talk) 08:25, 15 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.