Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Hermine 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 redirect‎ to Adolphus I, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Hermine 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)

This page is mainly a copy of Adolphus I, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe that only includes issue and marriage. Nothing on this page is about her and the rest is purely a genealogical entry (WP:NOTGENEALOGY), to add to that it has no citations. Azarctic (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Royalty and nobility, and Germany. Azarctic (talk) 23:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete it does not matter if there are citations at the minute, what matters is that there are some out there. As far as I can see, she is not notable for anything else other than family, so WP:NOTGENEALOGY applies. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to husband, but keep the categories and incoming redirects. Not notable in herself, but a valid redirect to her husband's article: keep the categories if sourced within husband's article (eg birth, death, etc), and the redirects from alternative versions of her name. PamD 08:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep what the hell? She was a princess consort of the Principality of Schaumburg-Lippe, a reigning house, and at the time, not an abolished princely state until the end of the German monarchies in 1918. She may be considered as the queen consort function, similar to Countess Marie Kinsky of Wchinitz and Tettau of Liechtenstein. Therefore, she was a consort of a princely state that passes WP:NPOL. She didn't have to do anything to become famous or garner attention because she was already the legitimate wife of a ruler! How much more do you need? She held more influence in her time than modern-day useless first ladies. If you disagree with my assertion, please note that she had an entry in Volume 7 of Women in World History: A Biographical Encyclopedia. Additionally, a street in Bückeburg was named in honor of the princess (see source), so the princess is also sufficient to meet WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. Please conduct research before voting on AfD, and why are people using AfD as a weapon?. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 15:52, 7 January 2024 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet of Taung Tan) DrKay (talk) 17:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is an informational website, nothing on this page has ANY information about HER! I doesn’t matter if she’s a Princess consort, I’ve seen pages get deleted for being a consort of some sort. She herself was not notable, and how could she meet WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO if there’s no information about her nor any citations. And she is only a consort, that doesn’t mean she meets WP:NPOL, her husband was the political ruler, not her. Azarctic (talk) 16:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So pitiful, 🥲. Learn more about Wikipedia's rules and policies. Don't just focus on criticizing others. Well! Queens or consorts are clearly notable if monarchy is not abolished. Of course, I will try to delete she was a consort of defunct head of house (pretender to defunct throne ). Queen consorts are a highest position of a country or princely state. As an example from my country, Inge Sargent, the princess consort of Hispaw State, is titled as queen consort. She doesn't need to do anything; as a queen, people from that state worship her like a god. If they meet her elsewhere, they need to kneel down and pay homage to her. Criticizing her will result in beheading. As for Burmese monarchy, but not sure on German. For GNG and ANYBIO issues, a street named after her is a sign of notability, and she has an entry in Women in World History, a standard notable dictionary for notable women. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 16:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Are you kidding me? Please explain your article first at Princess Christine Wilhelmine of Saxe-Eisenach! Don't pretend to be a good editor even if you have a similar issue with your article. This AfD appears to be a result of your frustration due to your article being in the process of deletion. It's meaningless.188.240.216.10 (talk) 17:02, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry! If you want to create royalty articles on Wikipedia, I'll be happy to help. I have 8 years of experience with royalty topics on Wikipedia. There are many anti-monarchy gangs and groups of thumbs. They will bite new editors and always challenge royalty articles. I have fought them for many years. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 17:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will not be explaining that as it has nothing to do with Hermine. These are two separate deletion discussions, and no, I never pretended to be a good wikipedia editor, although I have made many, some of mine actually had a biography, and was a duchess consort of Guastalla, yet they got redirected to different articles. I have also made successful articles though like Duke Maximilian of Württemberg and Princess Christine of Anhalt-Bernburg. Anyway I can’t see why you want a pointless article with no information to stay up! Azarctic (talk) 17:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ohh boy! I got you. I can remember this AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duke Maximilian of Württemberg. Thanks for creating a good article. Let's discuss the topic. As you said, 'some of mine actually had a biography and were a duchess consort of Guastalla.' So, did she have a biography? From where? A book, dictionary, or a primary website? If she has a bio or entry in a notable book or dictionary, she surely passes WP:ANYBIO. However, having a bio on a personal website can't make her pass WP:GNG. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 17:36, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it’s cause one of the admins on this website liked to target me, nonetheless it was kept. Theodora of Hesse-Darmstadt (see the deleted revision), also know as Duchess Consort of Gustalla had editors that contributed to it as well, but it was mainly cited from online books. It got redirected to Antonio Ferrante Gonzaga Azarctic (talk) 17:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah! you was a target of that group as i can see [1]. Pls careful in future. They are ever bullying like blow wind and used admin power for misusing. However, some are good like user:Jfire I love him. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 17:49, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I’m very angry to see the case of Theodora! If I were active at that time, I would have certainly defended her. However, I'm happy to know you, as we share an interest in royalty or nobility. Please let me share the monarchy system of my country - the Burmese monarchy differs from the Western monarchy system; the monarch owns the lives of the people in the kingdom and holds immense power, akin to a god.

The children of Western monarchs may face deletion on Wikipedia for various reasons. However, they can't attack Burmese royalty, such as princesses or princes, because the king has granted his every child and father-in-law the appanage of the town as myoza making every monarch's child a minor ruler in their own right. This makes them easily meet the criteria for WP:NPOL. There was an attempt in the past on Taingda Princess, but Burmese editors defended it with facts. How shameful their actions were. You can learn some AfD outcomes to make you more stronger: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeanne-Françoise de Coeme, Lady of Lucé and Bonnétable, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbara of Württemberg, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maharani Kishori, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taingda Princess, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Queen Seonjeong, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Gyeongchang. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 18:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I have decided myself after this that I will not nominate any more articles up for deletion after this. But what frustrated me the most is that the admin that put the good articles up for deletion, had also edited Hermine’s page [2] but then he has the brass decency to edit this page of which he acknowledged had no information or any citations, but put people like Theodora’s page up for deletion. I made my point across to him many times, of which he ignored so I have given up making articles that actually take my time up just for them to get redirected/deleted. Azarctic (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand how you feel. I'm okay if the article was deleted because it's not my business and not related to Asian royalty. I find it easier to defend Asian royalty articles since I'm a scholar of Asian royals and traditions. Defending Western royalty is challenging because most are constitutional monarchies, and the monarch's child rarely holds the title of duke or duchess in their own right.

In Myanmar, princes, princesses, and even queens who held the position of 'myoza' had the right to attend the royal parliament (hluttaw). Western monarchs may not follow these royal traditions. If your articles face challenges in the future, especially for AfD, and if the consort has no power in her own right, you can save her by presenting offline sources (if available). You can provide screenshots of pages uploaded on Google Drive, as shown here: example link. Pls learn from previous AfD outcomes above and defeat them next time. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 18:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The admin who targeted you is nearly impossible to defeat, even for me. He holds significant power on Wikipedia, being an administrator with a thorough understanding of policies. Occasionally, he might misuse his knowledge, for example, "labeling a subject about a cat as a dog. Many members of his thug group follow his lead, verifying it as a dog." Do you understand what I mean? Keep fighting and continue your excellent work. If I have free time from my studies, I'll be here to help. Thanks, and take care. 188.240.216.10 (talk) 18:41, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to husband's article. No independent notability but a valid redirect. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect it to the article on her husband. It can always be recreated in the future if someone can dig out information about her and provide reliable sources. Keivan.f^Talk 16:29, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete Not more than a genealogical note. I can verify that she has an entry in the Women in World History: A Biographical Encyclopedia by searching her name + book name, but I can't access it to read due to Google Book content restrictions. I'm not sure if it's sufficient to meet WP:ANYBIO. If someone can access it online, read the Encyclopedia, and provide a substantial explanation in the article, I will reconsider my vote. For now, deletion would be preferable. 84.247.96.12 (talk) 23:53, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge selectively and redirect. The only part that is unique and important is her genealogical table, which connects her from George II to the House of Orange. That can be merged into her husband's article, and a redirect for the remainder. Alternately, I would not oppose a plain redirect. Bearian (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: per nom and reasons above. // Timothy :: talk 02:01, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per reasoning provided by Keivan.f EmilySarah99 (talk) 13:27, 12 January 2024 (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.