Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bulgarian ancestry of royals of Bulgaria

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. Mr.Z-man 05:15, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bulgarian ancestry of royals of Bulgaria[edit]

This article constitutes a great deal of personal research that tenuous, remote and distant connections of the House of Wettin in Bulgaria to earlier Slavic and Bulgarian dynasties which is inappropriate for inclusion on Wikipedia. Similar descents listed for other individuals (such as Nicholas II) have been deleted or switched from selective descents to general ancestry. Since Wikipedia is not a genealogical repository, this article is out of place and oversteps the line of what is worth including in Wikipedia and what is not. I don't think that very distant Bulgarian connections were the reason for choosing Ferdinand of Kohary and Saxe-Coburg and Gotha as sovereign prince in 1887 as most of Europe's royals would have shared them. Charles 07:07, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also for consideration are the follow articles for basically the same reasons. If for any reason there are different opinions for different articles, please make note:

Delete As nominator. Charles 07:10, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, while of minor interest in particular articles, this essentially constitutes genealogical trivia that is difficult to source authoritatively to begin with and is wrapped in all sorts of nationalistic POV that is extremely difficult to unravel. It's of interest to say that because of Diana, Princess of Wales the future King William is likely the most English king of England in centuries, but the entire topic is not worthy of a bothersomely synethetic article. --Dhartung | Talk 23:25, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all of these articles seem to have a nationalistic POV in mind; basically they're pushing an agenda. There may be the occasional time when a genealogy like this is widely published (e.g. Jacobite succession - but the four articles here don't seem to fall into that category. They verge on original research. Noel S McFerran (talk) 09:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all Regardless of the motive for insertion, these are good summary articles in an area where we have weak coverage. It obviously needs proper sourcing. There shouldnt be any problem finding that. We are indeed not genealogy--and these articles are not genealogy. If it were it would show all the connections at every step of the line. This instead is the appropriate depth of coverage. (With respect to the Jacobites, the removal of these would be a clear expression of wp's national bias). They are not OR, just assembly of data from obvious secondary and tertiary sources. They should be retitled to eliminate the improper nationalism shown in the titles. DGG (talk) 10:00, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment These are genealogies, how could you say that they are not? These are articles based on singular ideas which have not shown to be of particularly important, contemporary consideration to these royals and when their monarchies were instituted. We don't have a Greek pedigree of Otto or Constantine of Greece or a Swedish pedigree of Charles Gustavus of Sweden and so on and so forth. Understand the multiplicity that such an article brings, articles which are already unsuited for Wikipedia. Charles 10:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, seems a clear nationalistic agenda and a violation of WP:SYN.--Aldux (talk) 21:35, 10 December 2007 (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.