Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Franziska of Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Schillingsfürst

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. Tone 15:26, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Franziska of Hohenlohe-Waldenburg-Schillingsfürst[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)

The subject is an obscure Austrian noblewoman who married into the House of Habsburg-Lorraine. She appears to have led a very private life as I can find no significant coverage in reliable sources, meaning that the topic does not pass WP:BASIC and WP:GNG. Wikipedia should not have articles on people solely for the sake of genealogy; see WP:NOTGENEALOGY policy. Surtsicna (talk) 14:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 14:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 14:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Surtsicna (talk) 14:58, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Devokewater (talk) 15:47, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, purely genealogical article. Smeat75 (talk) 19:28, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:DELREASON 8 (Articles whose subjects fail to meet the relevant notability guideline (WP:N, WP:GNG, WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, WP:CORP, and so forth)) and WP:DELREASON 14 (Any other content not suitable for an encyclopedia). The only coverage I am able to find is genealogical meaning the subject does not meet the notability guidelines (genealogy is not WP:Significant coverage) and the article is pure genealogy which violates WP:NOTGENEALOGY (and based on the lack of sources this does not seem to be a fixable problem). TompaDompa (talk) 23:03, 20 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.