Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prosper Anton Josef von Sinzendorf

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. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 12:00, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prosper Anton Josef von Sinzendorf

[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)

No refs on the page for many years. I don't see anything other than the briefest biographical details in genealogical lists. To start we need sources to verify the claims before we can even establish if the subject meets the

WP:GNG JMWt (talk) 10:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 10:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sources are available on the German equivalent article. The German version uses general referencing, which is quite normal there, but viewed as unacceptable by many editors here. In any case, it makes it very hard to work out which statements are verified by the (two) sources quoted. Both sources look like directories of nobility, and I personally have no intention of trying to get hold of the Allgemeines Adels-Archiv der Österreichischen Monarchie to rescue a small article about someone whose historical significance may not be outstanding. Elemimele (talk) 12:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can you link to the German article please, I cannot find it. CT55555(talk) 14:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
de.wiki. Curbon7 (talk) 17:52, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, $Salvio giuliano$ 12:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Royalty and nobility. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a courier at the royal court, and was lord of the Trpísty in Bohemia that appear to meet
WP:NPOL as a member of royal parliament during the monarchy period. Taung Tan (talk) 10:08, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Redirect: to Sinzendorf. Typically courtiers, particularly high-ranking ones like imperial chamberlains, have some mentions in era sources, but to the best of my ability, I was unable to uncover any sources mentioning the subject beyond listings. A redirect to his family makes the most sense, and he is already mentioned at that article. Curbon7 (talk) 17:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as there is coverage in German here 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:39, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which is literally a genealogical chart. The barest of details. JMWt (talk) 13:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Found several mentions of his name in Google Books, but i can't read German. Taung Tan (talk) 15:38, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I said in the nom, I also found mentions -usually one-line references to genealogies. The debate is whether there can in any sense be considered non-trivial and significant as per

WP:GNG. I say no. JMWt (talk) 16:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep. An Imperial chamberlain and counsellor is very likely to be notable, even without much sourcing found on him thus far. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:01, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- A "courtier, Counsellor and Chamberlain at the Imperial Court in Vienna" ought to be prominent enough to be notable and I would have expected him to have an article in some biographical dictionary. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:47, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A final relist. Some commenters here are probably right that there SHOULD be sources out there that mention this individual in some detail but, fortunately or unfortunately, an AFD discussion produces pressure to find and cite these references as a rebuttal to a nomination statement which hasn't happened. At this point, you might consider the option of a Redirect that has been suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:11, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per no sources even after a three week deletion procedure. Without applied sources, this might as well be pure fiction, because a reader wouldn't know the difference. The BURDEN remains on those urging keep to actually add RS in order to convince participants. I'm not convinced of presumed notability when the subject's mere existence isn't even verified on the article itself. BusterD (talk) 15:50, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails GNG and BIO. Checked de.wp article[1], single sources points to the name being listed in a collection of genealogies; see [2]. No SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. BEFORE showed nothing with SIGCOV. Having a title does not make an individual notable and genealogies do not show notability. // Timothy :: talk // Timothy :: talk 05:13, 2 April 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.