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. Consensus not to keep. No consensus to redirect, which means that a redirect can be separately created and contested. Sandstein 16:55, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ifan ap Robert[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 is a continuation of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomas ap Rhodri ab Owain Gwynedd, where other pages in this same genealogical lineage were deleted for want of notability. No biographical information, just placeholder in a genealogical descent. The title given, 'Head of the House of Aberffraw', is entirely made up, there being no evidence that such a role existed, let alone a formal title. Fails WP:NOTGENEALOGY, WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:BIO. Agricolae (talk) 17:33, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Agricolae (talk) 17:43, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wales-related deletion discussions. Agricolae (talk) 17:43, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article does not actually indicated that ap Robert held any authority or did anything of note. Wikipedia is not a genealogical database. We do not have articles just to fill out ancestral lines.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect -- The descent of the Gwydir family from the Princes of Wales is notable. The content at Tomas ap Rhodri ab Owain Gwynedd could be merged to House of Aberffraw, which could then be a redirect target. The alleged title "head of the house of Aberffraw" is misconceived, because primogeniture was not the Welsh inheritance practice until the Law in Wales Act (or Act of Union) 1536 applied English law to Wales. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:50, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the descent notable? All kinds of people claim descent from medieval princelings. Is every one of them inherently notable, just by virtue of the claim being made? As you explain, it is not like such a line would actually have made them 'rightful' rulers, because there was no consistent 'rightful' succession by primogeniture. Do we take every name in every one of the innumerable claimed descents from the secret love-child of Henry II and create a redirect to the House of Plantagenet? No, of course not. Agricolae (talk) 16:08, 4 August 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.