Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former Iraqi throne

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Line of succession to the former Iraqi throne[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 kingdom has been defunct since 1958. This unsourced article looks like unverifiable original research, including about the supposed royal status of living persons (WP:BLP). See also WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Compare Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former Austro-Hungarian throne for a similar case. Sandstein 12:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 12:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Iraq-related deletion discussions. Sandstein 12:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:DEL-REASON 6: Articles that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, including neologisms, original theories and conclusions, and articles that are themselves hoaxes (but not articles describing notable hoaxes). It is impossible to attribute the current line of succession to the Iraqi throne to WP:RELIABLE sources, because there is no current line of succession, because the monarchy doesn't exist anymore. TompaDompa (talk) 12:26, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The line is unsourced, hypothetical, and includes the names of multiple private minor citizens. Ra'ad bin Zeid could also use a look, as it makes the contentious claim that he is a "pretender" despite no such statement in the (sparse) references. There is a movement to restore the monarchy, promoted by the ICM party and led by Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein (who would not have been eligible for the throne by the old Constitution), but there is no published line of succession proposed on their website (which is in Indonesian for some reason??). Even if it did, the line would also have to be reported on by secondary sources. JoelleJay (talk) 18:47, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for all the reasons already given at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former Austro-Hungarian throne for that page. It is unclear to me from the relevant pages that the enthronement of Faisal I created an Iraqi royal right for his younger brother to begin with. On Ra'ad's page we say, without citation, that Zeid was "recognized as the Head of the Royal House of Iraq by his remaining agnatic co-heirs of Jordan" after the fall of Faisal II. That suggests he was not the recognized heir at the time the kingdom ceased to exist, and that the whole page is just reflecting a monarchist conceit among the Banu Hussain that named him as head of something that no longer existed (along the lines of the English kings calling themselves Kings of France for almost 400 years). Agricolae (talk) 19:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Usefulness is often not a valid reason for keeping an article. This seems to be a hobbyist's hardwork, which would be a shame to delete, but the throne no longer exists, so much of this article is speculation, assumption, and uncited creativity. Not enough to retain. doktorb _words^deeds 14:36, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and the other comments above.Smeat75 (talk) 20:03, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to Pretenders to the throne of Iraq and prune to s short article covering the claims of Ra'ad bin Zeid and Sharif Ali bin al-Hussein. The question probably depends on the pre-1958 constitution of Iraq, displaced in a revolution when the king and his family were murdered. The first is the nearest male heir, the second claims through the female line. Peterkingiron (talk) 17:20, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not against lists of succession per se of sovereign countries, but a stubification and renaming as per Peterkingiron might be in order. Let's discuss more. Bearian (talk) 16:55, 30 July 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.