Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ermengarde of Nevers

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. Vanamonde (Talk) 04:54, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ermengarde of Nevers

[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)

The article is sourced only to a 20th-century genealogical publication. Being part of a long genealogy of notable people does not make one notable. She seems to have held no position of power or government, and notability is not inherited from either her father or her son. Wikipedia is not a genealogical database. This article dates back to 2004, a time when Wikipedia had virtually no inclusion criteria, and was essentially a free-for all wild west of mass article creation. With this article having existed for 16 years, you find it in a lot of Wikipedia mirrors, and she shows up on multiple genealogical sites like Family Search and Ancestry, although in the user created databases and not in the primary records places, at least not on my initial search. Ancestry and Family Search rarely produce records that would actually show notability. Just because we know someones name, who they married, and who their child was does not make them notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia. John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:52, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:19, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No effective referencing. There is no real sources, if there were refs they would be there. The Gbook stuff is the same, marriage, passing mentions. scope_creep^Talk 08:28, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - WP:NOTINHERITED, no indication of independent notability. Agricolae (talk) 14:23, 19 September 2020 (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.