Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duchess Donata of Mecklenburg

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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn per sources discovered. Information added to article. (non-admin closure) // Timothy :: talk 02:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Duchess Donata of Mecklenburg[edit]

[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 is nothing more than a genealogical record. The topic fails WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. There are no reliable sources independent of the subject that cover anything directly and indepth about this individual because they have done absolutely nothing notable. Being related to a public figure is not notable WP:INVALIDBIO WP:NOTINHERITED. Wikipedia is WP:NOTGENEALOGY of non-notable members in royal families. // Timothy :: talk 05:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 05:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 05:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 05:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - "Duchess Donata of Mecklenburg ..... is the senior remaining member of the House of Mecklenburg-Schwerin. Since there are no males left in the family" that should pretty much say all what is needed to be said; We have come very close to the end of a aprox. thousand year old family. Oleryhlolsson (talk) 08:02, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not an argument for having an article about her. That much can be said in the article about the family itself. Also, Mecklenburg-Schwerin was only created in 1701. The rest of the House of Mecklenburg is very much extant. Surtsicna (talk) 10:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – I second your reasoning -JamesyWamesy (talk) 01:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this one because there is a significant coverage of the subject in German-language media.[1] She is an active public figure and has been the subject of articles in a variety of reputable German newspapers, national as well as regional, including Die Welt (here), Ostsee-Zeitung (here), Schweriner Volkszeitung (here), etc. Unfortunately, nothing in the article suggests that she is notable as a landowner and heir of a vast art collection. One can be forgiven for thinking that the article is yet another genealogical entry. Surtsicna (talk) 10:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete consists entirely of genealogy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.110.217.186 (talk) 15:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep nomination withdrawn per sources discovered by Surtsicna. I will add the sources above to the article. Thanks // Timothy :: talk 02:03, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources added. // Timothy :: talk 02:20, 16 August 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.