Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/States headed by Elizabeth II

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 keep. Mz7 (talk) 11:37, 5 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

States headed by Elizabeth II[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)

As per talk page: the title is unwieldy and the article exactly correlates to Commonwealth realm, whose first sentence reads "A Commonwealth realm is a sovereign state in which Queen Elizabeth II is the reigning constitutional monarch." So far as I can see there is no information in this article which is not found in the Commonwealth realm article. Does anybody in the world imagine that there is a nation where the Queen is the head of state and she is not simultaneously the monarch? Why do we need two articles covering exactly the same ground? I suggest that this article's content be merged with Commonwealth realm if any difference can be discerned. Pete (talk) 21:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - as this appears to be an attempt to deny that Elizabeth II is Australia's head of state. Note that about a week ago, the nominator unilaterally removed 'head of state' from the Commonwealth realm article. GoodDay (talk) 21:40, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As per my comment there, are you somehow implying that if the Queen is head of state, she is not also the monarch? I mean, she's not head of state of any place but a monarchy, now is she? Also, you haven't addressed the points raised for deletion:

The title is awkward
The material duplicates that found in Commonwealth realm

Why do we need two articles covering the exact same ground? --Pete (talk) 21:47, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've given my two cents. It's up to the rest now. GoodDay (talk) 21:50, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:46, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:46, 28 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there is a difference in the way that the information is presented between the two articles: one is descriptive and addresses the present situation with a separate section on history, while this one is more of a straight timeline. It's possible that they could be merged, but at some point someone else is going to be Leader of the Commonwealth, and then the meanings of the two pages will further diverge. If the current title is awkward then a better one can be proposed, but I think it's fine. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:36, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Commonwealth realm. While it's true that this page presents the information in a different format than the other one does, that's not a reason why they need two separate articles — simply adding the table to the other article wouldn't overwhelm it. Bearcat (talk) 17:33, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Elizabeth's unusually long reign (the chance that any of her immediate successors will come even close to matching her is essentially nil) plus the fact that her reign covered the period of decolonization when many former British colonies were Commonwealth realms of ephemeral periods of time, make this page both of interest and distinct from Commonwealth realm per se. Plus already there are countries where George VI was head of state where Elizabeth wasn't. If it's going to be merged with anything, perhaps it should be that other page of Elizabethan superlatives, List of prime ministers of Elizabeth II. --Jfruh (talk) 22:48, 29 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep obviously notable - advocacy deletion causes should be closed immediately. Speedy keep Speedy close.--Moxy (talk) 22:15, 31 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Undoubtedly notable, the only question is if it duplicates information in Commonwealth realm. I think there are enough differences to warrant an individual article, and it can also be expanded. Hzh (talk) 11:13, 5 November 2018 (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.