Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Guda of Waldeck and Pyrmont

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 09:05, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Guda of Waldeck and Pyrmont[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)

No evidence of notability: her entire article is just her ancestry, sourced exclusively to one nobility genealogy book. BEFORE turned up wiki mirrors, fandoms, pinterest, and genealogy sites. JoelleJay (talk) 04:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. JoelleJay (talk) 04:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. JoelleJay (talk) 04:17, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non notable --Devokewater@ 08:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this person fails WP:GNG, and the article in its current state fails WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Devonian Wombat (talk) 10:59, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, no indication of notability, this article is basically a WP:HOAX since this person is not a princess, being born after such positions were abolished in the country she was born.Smeat75 (talk) 21:19, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am less than convinced that every princeling in Germany was notable. Clearly not every member of every family of princelings. Doubly so when the princelings themselves lost power 20 years before you were born.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:53, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 15:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article is a genealogical record and Wikipedia is WP:NOTGENEALOGY. The article does not meet WP:GNG and WP:BASIC. There are no reliable sources independent of the subject that cover anything about the subject directly and indepth. Being related to a public figure is not notable WP:INVALIDBIO WP:NOTINHERITED. Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE: "As explained in § Encyclopedic content above, merely being true, or even verifiable, does not automatically make something suitable for inclusion in the encyclopedia." // Timothy :: talk 01:44, 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.