Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Isabelle of Isenburg

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:13, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Isabelle of Isenburg

[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)

I can find no evidence of

WP:GNG notability (it's almost an A7). The article says that her father is the heir of the last ruler of a tiny state abolished 200 years ago, and her late husband also was the heir of the last rules of another tiny state abolished 200 years ago. The only content specific to the person (and not her relation to others) seems to be her date of birth, not quite enough for a BLP I think. —Kusma (t·c) 11:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Kusma (t·c) 11:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. —Kusma (t·c) 11:14, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:36, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No indication of notability and a clear case of
WP:NOTGENEALOGY. Lennart97 (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete per nom (lack of notability). — -1

Delete Whatever her career is, it's not notable and not stated in the article. Oaktree b (talk) 16:43, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non notable --Devokewater (talk) 17:26, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Weak case of notability. Mukt (talk) 18:20, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - notability is not inherited, and there's no evidence that she's notable in her own right. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - she is relevant, together with her husband, was representative of an active mediatized family from Germany. Cronista de Historias (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
delete per ab0ve.--
talk) 08:59, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete . Her claim to fame is that she is the younger daughter of two people neither of whom have an article and the wife of a man who doesn't have an article. DrKay (talk) 16:39, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. No GNG claim. Kolma8 (talk) 21:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per DrKay. JoelleJay (talk) 23:29, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. VocalIndia (talk) 16:55, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Zin Win Hlaing (talk) 10:00, 15 February 2021 (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.