Talk:Christopher O'Neill

Ducal title
Why wouldn't he be a Duke Consort (of his wife's dukedom) like his brother-in-law (and like the Spanish custom)?C&#39;est la vie (talk) 00:11, 12 November 2013 (UTC) Because he didn't become a (dual/triple) Swedish citizen?C&#39;est la vie (talk) 00:15, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sweden doesn't have the custum like Spain of automatically become a "Duke Consort" as husband of a duchess. Westling (his brother-in-law) was created a reall Prince of Swede, and only after an official announcement from the Swedish Royal Court (i.e. the King) it was informed that he would be named a "Duke of Västergötland" as well. I don't know whether this means he is really created a Duke, or solely named a Duke (as a consort). Anyway, this is not the case with O'Neill; no creation or announced he is a Duke. Probably because he isn't a prince (in Sweden only princes/princesses are created Duke or Duchess), since he is not a member of the Swedish royal family and declined Swedish citizenship. Dr. D.E. Mophon (talk) 01:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I see, thanks!C&#39;est la vie (talk) 02:08, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The distinction, if any, between being created a duke or being named a duke is not clear to me. Is that legitimate or contrived terminology for making a difference? I'm not sure there is one at all. If there is, then re: Sweden, we'd have to say that no one has been created a (political) duke since the 1620s but that many royals since then have been named (titular) dukes and duchesses. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Notability?
This man made it clear he wanted to remain a private person. He is not a member of the royal family, does no royal/state business, and holds no title. The official website of the Swedish monarchy does not have an entry for him. It does not list him at his wife's side, unlike the King's other children-in-law. So why do we have this article? Surtsicna (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The 18 other pages for him and the large number of sources suggests that he is notable. Please nominate for deletion if you wish to see this article deleated. A lack of replies is not consensus for WP:BOLD blanking and creating a redirect. Domdeparis (talk) 16:14, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Firstly, one does not need consensus for WP:BOLD. That's the entire point of the guideline. And of course, if nobody objects for two weeks, I will act. It took more than a month after I acted for anyone to care. Surtsicna (talk) 17:58, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * To care? You did not ask anyone specific. You simply do not have a case here in terms of notability. And to redirect a article without any proper discussion first, especially with a article like this one take plenty of AGF to see as simply a redirect based on guidelines. Anyway feel free to take this through the proper channel called AfD. --BabbaQ (talk) 21:27, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Which specific user should I have asked? Who is the owner of this article? I started a proper discussion at the proper venue. Despite your disturbing dislike of me, you should feel free to participate in any talk page discussion I start. Surtsicna (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That's exactly my point. You can carry out bold edits when you want I am just reminding you that alack of replies is not consensus. So now it has been reverted you need to take it to AFD. Domdeparis (talk) 23:15, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Owner of this article? Dislike? I am sinply reacting to a strange Redirect. If you start a discussion about something you must expect responses of some kind. Especially with such a weird Redirect.BabbaQ (talk) 06:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Despite the sources and the other articles there may be a case for him not meeting notability the article is particularly poor in information and if he hadn't married into the Swedish royal family I very much doubt that he would have had his own page. I haven't looked at the sources so I don't know if there is much in them over and above his marriage. If they are not in depth coverage this probably won't survive an AfD. I would suggest that those who might want to keep the article improve it and those that might want to see it deleted carry out a WP:BEFORE search and propose an WP:AFD. Domdeparis (talk) 08:33, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * With all respect Domdeparis but you can not make such a statement without actually looking at the sources first. If you did, then you would see that there are plenty of reliable and third party sources. No one on Wikipedia would have their own page without a certain thing happening like a career etc, so the comment about his marriage is redundant and magical ball-ish. BabbaQ (talk) 08:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)
 * What I am saying is that the article does not suggest notability over and above his marriage. I don't need to look at the sources to say that. If there is more to him than being a "husband of" then this needs to be shown in the article. Articles of this kind regularly get deleted if the subject is not independently notable. Being the husband of a Princess is not enough in itself to confer notability as per WP:BIOFAMILY. The only information in the article not linked to his status as "husband of" that is not simple biographical info (born here, studied there, father was this cousin was that etc) is this statement "He was a Partner and Head of Research at Noster Capital and former employee of NM Rothschild and Sons and Steinberg Asset Management." if there was significant coverage of his professional activities then he might be independently notable but the source for this statement is the royal court of Sweden so not independent and not worth looking at. So as I said the article as is does not suggest notability other than as a family member so fails WP:BIOFAMILY. I reinstated the article from a redirect because of the number of sources and other versions but this does not mean I valid his notability it just means that I believe to be deleted a discussion is necessary. I am giving my opinion about what has to be done by either a keep advocate or a delete advocate...I am neither. If you do not want to take the advice that is up to you I am simply giving my opinion for what it is worth. Domdeparis (talk) 10:00, 27 October 2017 (UTC)