Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richardice of Sweden

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. JohnCD (talk) 23:28, 18 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Richardice of Sweden[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A concern was raised that "Richardice" is a WP:MADEUP translation of "Richardis" and that use of this spelling cannot be found in relevant sources.

Initially, the page was PROD'ed. However, the page creator is under an interaction ban with the proposer and so could not remove the PROD. I am proposing for discussion among uninvolved editors instead. RA (talk) 23:21, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

User who created the page did so because h/s believes that the name has been used in older English literature, that cannot yet be accessd through the Internat, and would like to have a bit of time to try to find such sources. There is very little English literature mentioning the names of 14th century queens of Sweden, Internet or no, and this English exonym at least looks etymologically correct to me. SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:13, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the point is that this name form is not found in the literature for any bearer, be it the empress Saint Richardis or any of the other Richardis (given name) (except for some microbe): compare Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL with Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL for the amount of literature; the editor has a habit of creating redirects and disambiguation pages on Wikipedia to spread his own anglicizations; some are amusing, like Sonny Cisco, but something like this just causes confusion. I removed this made-up name form from several articles, as there is not a shred of evidence to support the "belief" that it was used in the older English litereture. /Pieter Kuiper (talk) 07:16, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing admin: SergeWoodzing is the initial page creator. Pieter Kuiper is the user who PROD'ed the article.

Delete An interesting discussionof these "exonyms" is Talk:Anund Jacob. There, SergeWoodzing had found an translation of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle from 1823 where a whole other "Anund" was called "Anwynd", and took is as basis for another otherwise unknown "exonym". I strongly suspect something similar is going on here. Whether other women named Richardis ever are referred to as "Richardice" is irrelevant; if these two are not, we should not apply that "translation". Andejons (talk) 19:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – we already have the page Richardis (given name), so creating an additional page Richardice of Sweden for only one person called Richardice is somewhat surplus to requirements. If Richardice turns out to be a correct name, then including it as a variant on the Richardis (given name) page and creating a redirect from Richardice to Richardis (given name) would seem to be more helpful to the Wikipedia reader. — Hebrides (talk) 12:55, 16 March 2012 (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.