Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Alexia of Greece and Denmark

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. Consensus is that she passes

(non-admin closure) Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Princess Alexia of Greece and Denmark

[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)

Notability issues. For context, see

WP:TRAINWRECK

).

If you cut all the info about other people she’s related to, the article does not contain much, because she’s had a rather normal life (she was born here, she grew up there, she studied here, she works as a teacher, she married someone). But that is not an argument for deletion. There is no question that sources only exist because she is part of a famous family, but our job is to evaluate whether those sources meet

WP:GNG

, not second-guess the decisions of the editors-in-chief of those sources.

The problem, however, is the lack of depth among independent sources.

For instance, this Vogue article offers a detailed account of the wedding. It is very likely reliable. However, the amount of content usable by Wikipedia is "she married person X at date Y in place Z". We don’t care about the dress she wore, what persons were in attendance, etc. So that’s not in-depth.

There’s a bunch of entries on royalty websites / books etc. such as ref #1 ("Burke's Royal Families of the World"). I have no doubt that those accurately represent matters such as births, deaths, marriages, succession laws and the like. However, those are glorified phone books: they cover everyone (with some royal connection) and provide the same standardized details. Not in-depth.

Finally, one can find a few tabloid / gossip sources online, but those are obviously not reliable. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:47, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Royalty and nobility, and Greece. Shellwood (talk) 14:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Daughter of a king (an actual reigning king at the time) and former heir to the throne. I cannot see in which bizarre world she would not be notable. The fact the monarchy has now been abolished in Greece is irrelevant. Once notable, always notable. This strikes me as a ludicrous nomination. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:58, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There’s no doubt that Constantine II is notable, but
that doesn’t mean his daughter is. Where are the sources? Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:06, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Sometimes
WP:INHERITED. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:16, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
If you mean that GNG sources are optional for articles because some topics are clearly notable, well, let’s agree to disagree and wait for others to comment.

If you mean that surely those sources must exist, then where are they? (Yes,
I tried finding them.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:30, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. Agreed that the coverage of encyclopedic details is lacking in depth and very much limited to her family rather than to her. What do Greek sources look like? JoelleJay (talk) 17:00, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Had she been merely a princess, I would have supported the nomination. That is basically what happened to two articles on daughters of Michael I of Romania. But the fact that she was heiress presumptive to the Greek throne is enough to make her notable in my opinion. Yes the article is lacking in many ways and is certainly not perfect, but I think there could be room for improvement if we look into Greek sources as well. Keivan.f^Talk 20:21, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Not only was her father a reigning monarch at the time of her birth, She was the Crown Princess at the time of her birth until the birth of her brother, and therefore the heir to the throne of Greece. Absolutely notable. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:35, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Obvious
Avilich (talk) 01:39, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Neither of them were born to a reigning monarch, but more importantly neither of them was ever heir to the throne of a country. Keivan.f^Talk 03:04, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of those things are valid keep reasons. She doesn't meet GNG, so she should not have a standalone biography. JoelleJay (talk) 03:12, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Then other AfDs about other articles should not be brought up as they are not valid reasons for deletion either. Keivan.f^Talk 05:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm trying to establish if she passes
WP:BASIC. There are a few inches about her wedding, husband, pre-wedding ball, wedding guests at: THEODORACOPULOS, T. Royal Is as Royal Does. National Review, [s. l.], v. 51, n. 15, p. 29–30, 1999. Disponível em: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=2064633&site=eds-live&scope=site. Acesso em: 21 mar. 2023. CT55555(talk) 03:47, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
The following article (from around the same time, same event) is all about her wedding: Archer, P. (1999, Jul 10). Princess alexia's big day: [1 edition]. The Scotsman Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/princess-alexias-big-day/docview/326782961/se-2 CT55555(talk) 03:48, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Brief mention here: Grove, V. (1993, Sep 13). When constantine was told to go;ex-king constantine II of greece. The Times Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/when-constantine-was-told-go-ex-king-ii-greece/docview/318016844/se-2 CT55555(talk) 03:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Significant coverage here about her attending her father's funeral, where she lives (Lanzarote), her time as first in line to the throne, the names of all her children Translated by Content Engine, L. L. C. (2023, Jan 17). This is the canary island family of king constantine of greece that attracted all the attention during his funeral. CE Noticias Financieras Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/wire-feeds/this-is-canary-island-family-king-constantine/docview/2766847549/se-2 CT55555(talk) 03:52, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2001 coverage about her being potentially a target of attack and her relations to UK royalty: :WILKINSON, I. (2001, Jan 27). Princess warned of attack: [final edition]. The Gazette Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/princess-warned-attack/docview/433677591/se-2 CT55555(talk) 03:53, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I"m going to stop adding sources above. They are easy to find at ProQuest. Search for ""Princess Alexia" and "King Constantine"". She clearly passes
WP:GNG but I'm stopping doing further analysis as BASIC is good enough for my vote and it seems clear to me that someone who was next in line for a throne is very likely notable. CT55555(talk) 03:55, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
By the way, I disagree with the part of the nomination that she had a normal life. She was the first born of a King, a princess to two countries and related to the UK royal family in some way. They seem to have been exiled. She had a royal wedding and ball and was the an ETA attack target. That is not a "normal life". CT55555(talk) 03:58, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This and this are plainly trivial mentions. The relevant parts of this source is "Princess Alexia of Greece and Denmark, who lives in Lanzarote with her family, attended the event accompanied by her husband" and "Princess Alexia and her family had front row seats during the funeral", plus some routine background info -- does not count towards BASIC. This one is almost exclusively about the alleged plot, again with no more than brief background information. INVALIDBIO still applies: her "notability" is still exclusively derived from her royal family relations.
Avilich (talk) 04:18, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
I don't think it's important to debate the borderline trivial ones, unless you think every source in the article and above is, which seems unlikely. There is enough to make as well sourced article, which is what I think
WP:BASIC is all about. I also don't think it matters if her notability is "exclusively derived from her royal family relations" because that is the case for every royal person the world over. CT55555(talk) 06:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep. Sourcing has been found both in the article and in this AfD. Also please keep in mind that nominators are expected to determine whether there are sources for subjects in their native script
WP:BEFORE nominating for deletion (see step B7). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:56, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep.
WP:GNG. Here's a couple more. This translated from Vanity Fair, Spanish edition.[1] and this also in Spanish, presumably a reliable source.[2] Rupples (talk) 03:48, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

KEEP - per Necrothesp KatoKungLee (talk) 00:13, 25 March 2023 (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.