Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fernando María Muñoz y Borbón, 2nd Duke of Tarancón


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:08, 14 June 2021 (UTC)

Fernando María Muñoz y Borbón, 2nd Duke of Tarancón

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails at WP:N, WP:V, and WP:RS. No reliable source exists regarding this person. JayzBox (talk) 01:31, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * leaning delete I can find Spanish language genealogical works which appear to ratify the basics of his place in the nobility, but other than that I'm not seeing any biographical data. The paucity of info suggests a lack of notability, particularly since I'm not seeing English language works that mention him. Mangoe (talk) 03:28, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 05:18, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 05:18, 29 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete I learned today that Tarancón is a municipality of Spain located in the province of Cuenca, Castilla–La Mancha. I found that out because I was looking for anything about the history of Tarancón that might substantiate any notability for our boy Fernando. Given that he was the duke of a two-line stub, I think we can safely assume that his notability is passing to the point where he wouldn't trouble WP:GNG. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 13:57, 29 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: There is an entry in the biographical dictionary of the Real Academia de la Historia (link), some coverage in La Nueva España (link) and appears in many books, although I had no access to verify the extent of coverage. Alternatively, move to Ducado de Montmorot together with other minor dukes of the same dukedom. MarioGom (talk) 12:36, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Nobody's saying he didn't exist, just that his existence was in no way notable. Did he invent the self-propelling hydrant or challenge our knowledge of the mushroom? Lead a nation to war? Discover Chile? No, he did not. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * An article in a major reference work of Spanish history is a pretty good start for GNG. MarioGom (talk) 12:46, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Even if it does point to a life of absolute lack of notability for any reason other than being a very minor aristocrat? Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 12:50, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly. There are people with great achievements who lack reliable sources to back our notability criteria, and viceversa. MarioGom (talk) 12:53, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  08:25, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - the sources provided by User:MarioGom - which I've now added to the article - are more than enough to meet WP:GNG / ANYBIO. This nomination, like so many, could have been avoided by a better WP:BEFORE. Ingratis (talk) 11:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The nomination remains bang on and it's not a question of a 'better WP:BEFORE'. The guy's not notable. WP:NOTGENEALOGY. He was nobody, he did nothing, he represents nothing; he existed, presumably passed on his genes and passed. He has left no enduring monument in structure, deed or thought. Errr, that's it. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 16:01, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - 1) The nom User:JayzBox claimed that there was no reliable source about this person: this is untrue, as a better WP:BEFORE would have made clear. 2) User:MarioGom has already dealt above with your other point. The requirement at WP:ANYBIO is that "the person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary (e.g. the Dictionary of National Biography)", which is what the DBE of the Real Academia is. Ingratis (talk) 16:53, 5 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment It should not be part of our deletion process to denigrate the subject of the article, even if not a BLP. Especially when statements like he did nothing" means at the most he did nothing which I so far have been able to find" or refers to a parody list of unlikely accomplishments.  DGG ( talk ) 22:28, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Redirect to Agustín Fernando Muñoz y Sánchez, 1st Duke of Riánsares - The DBe, as a national dictionary, seems to be reliable, but meeting criterion 3 of WP:ANYBIO isn't a guarantee of inclusion. WP:ANYBIO is prefaced with in the previous section: "... Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included."
 * The DBe entry focuses on his family, titles, and important events in his life, so we can reliably source that information, but I don't see any other information in that entry and the current Wikipedia article to show me why he is notable in his own right. Maybe Spanish-language sources can be found to expand upon this, but I'm not seeing notability at this time. Aranya (talk) 00:27, 7 June 2021 (UTC) (changed vote 03:22, 8 June 2021 (UTC))
 * Some people are notable for who they are, not for what they do. But if that's too much to swallow, WP:ATD - redirect to Agustín Fernando Muñoz y Sánchez, 1st Duke of Riánsares. Ingratis (talk) 02:32, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've appended my original vote with an alternative. What I meant in my rationale is that I believe the DBe entry does not highlight either of those - it just lists some biographical details routine for nobility. In the same vein, the two sentences on him in the La Nueva España article merely inform us about his family history and titles and then his marriage to Eladia Bernaldo de Quirós. Sorry if I'm being redundant. Aranya (talk) 03:22, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep Passes GNG and WP:ANYBIO per the sources provided by MarioGom. So poor WP:IDONTLIKE are arrived here. Best, VocalIndia (talk) 10:59, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes GNG thanks to MarioGom's sources.Jackattack1597 (talk) 19:51, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV per MarioGom's sources.4meter4 (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2021 (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.