Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Child of Prince William, Duke of Cambridge


 * 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. Secret account 07:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Child of Prince William, Duke of Cambridge

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

contested PROD. The kid hasn't been born yet and for all we know Catherine could lose the baby. Wikipedia is not the news or a crystal ball. All information should be referenced in William and Catherine's articles for now. And this page deleted and no redirects, especially as the pair are very likely to have more children GAtechnical (talk) 15:44, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:03, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete WP:CRYSTAL. There will be a great deal of speculation about the sex, name, colour of the nursery, and so forth. It will occupy a great deal of print and virtual space. But it is not what WP is for. It is also the Duchess of Cambridge's child, and it does not yet have an identity independent of the mother. --AJHingston (talk) 17:51, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. I remember coming across this PROD and thinking the same thing. The big thing about this is that there is nothing about this child that can't be currently covered in the article for the Duchess of Cambridge. There's nothing we can really say about him or her that isn't directly related to the DoC, as the child isn't born. Other than that, all we can say is that the child exists as a fetus. It's not really even a "child" yet in the most technical sense of the term, although that's a whole different discussion. The bottom line is that this is just too soon and will probably be "too soon" for at least a good few years after his/her birth. Notability is not inherited by having famous and royal parents, after all. I also think that this wouldn't serve as a good redirect as we all hope that the two are blessed with as many babies as can fill Buckingham Palace. The singular term is one that would swiftly become inaccurate as soon as she has a second successful birth. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   18:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Straight up Delete per AJHingston, as clear a violation of WP:CRYSTAL as they come. MIVP - (Can I Help?) (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 19:07, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. At least wait for the fetus to be born/named. Safiel (talk) 23:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete as premature -- When the baby is born and named, it will be 3th in line to the UK throne, and notable as such, but there will be little to be said about it until it is much older. Peterkingiron (talk) 21:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Catherine,_Duchess_of_Cambridge. No *need* to delete, but certainly not worthy of an article, yet.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:11, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Please read the title. It says child. They are likely to have more children. Secondly it's about William not Catherine so again just plain wrong for a redirect. GAtechnical (talk) 10:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment Agreed. Completely useless as a redirect. Safiel (talk) 03:26, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete wikipedia is not in a hurry to create subjects that do not exist yet. MilborneOne (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. We will not lose any information if we wait until this person is born to create an article about them. The title would not be particularly useful as a redirect, either. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)


 * 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.