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 George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont. clpo13_(talk) 19:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen[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)

WP:NOTGENEALOGY. It's a repeat of information at George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont and consists solely of genealogical information. Fails WP:GNG. DrKay (talk) 19:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Germany. DrKay (talk) 19:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Curbon7 (talk) 21:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, should not be deleted. the Princess Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen is a historical person and is of interest for a online bibliotheca like Wikipedia. --92.76.102.53 (talk) 21:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 21:44, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per 92.76.102.53 - I shall also add that there are short sections ("Early life" and "Later life") pertaining to her life. Scribbie (talk) 22:12, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I have added extra information prior to her early life and later life so it isn’t a copy of George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont. Most of it is about her and her family. Therefore doesn’t fit wp:NOTGENEALOGY. My other account reason : Princess Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen's article should definitely stay on Wikipedia for a variety of reasons. Firstly, she holds historical significance as a prominent figure in the 18th century, with her marriage and connections to other ruling houses. Additionally, her article is mostly cited, providing reliable sources for readers to explore further. Preserving her legacy ensures that future generations can learn about her accomplishments and the broader historical context. YorkDr (talk) 21:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify: while it's no longer a clear-cut case of WP:NOTGENEALOGY, the early life content is still very brief and uncited. With more citations and a cleaned-up or removed "marriage and issue" section it might pass notability Dan • ✉ 01:53, 17 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: beyond the case of WP:NOTGENEALOGY. She was a historical princess, unlike today's seemingly insignificant or powerless constitutional monarchy. If you have a penchant for article deletion, please AfD them. Thanks. 85.229.188.50 (talk) 13:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet of 2001:2042:6C20:F200:4531:44AE:5916:820A) DrKay (talk) 20:47, 19 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Royaltycruft, fails GNG and NBIO. Notability is not inherited and nothing indicates this individual was notable in themselves or did anything of significance. The article is part genealogy (much of it unsourced) and part royaltycruft memorial. // Timothy :: talk 15:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:16, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Princess Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen's article should definitely stay on Wikipedia for a variety of reasons. Firstly, she holds historical significance as a prominent figure in the 18th century, with her marriage and connections to other ruling houses. Additionally, her article is mostly cited, providing reliable sources for readers to explore further. Preserving her legacy ensures that future generations can learn about her accomplishments and the broader historical context. Azarctic (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC) This user has already declared above, under a different user name (his third in as many weeks). DrKay (talk) 22:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, looking for policy-oriented contributions which have been missing on the 'keep' side so far.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 03:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont per WP:ATD - not an implausible search term. Ingratis (talk) 08:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont seems like a good solution, but please don't forget to add her portrait to his article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cielquiparle (talk • contribs) 06:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to her husband's article. I've already merged the relevant content there. Celia Homeford (talk) 12:24, 2 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.