Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick IV of Fürstenberg


 * 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. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:24, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Frederick IV of Fürstenberg

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Biograpical article that is only a genealogical entry. No other indication of importance. Nobility alone doesn't create notabiliy. Per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Ben Ben (talk) 17:47, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Ben Ben (talk) 17:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Ben Ben (talk) 17:53, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep He's in the major German biographical dictionary, and we regard everyone there as notable . He was a ruling prince, with sovereignty over his County under the Holy Roman Empire. Just needs expansion and context--there are detailed histories, and much more to be said.  DGG ( talk ) 04:57, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 00:45, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep; WP:POLITICIAN is sufficient, since sovereigns of independent states are politicians who have held national office, no matter how tiny the state. Nyttend (talk) 14:12, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Same as in the article discussion about his father: One of his successors was raised to principality, see Fürstenberg (principality). He died as a Count, not as a Fürst. Redirect to Fürstenberg-Heiligenberg?--Ben Ben (talk) 15:36, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I fail to see what would be gained by deletion here. Carrite (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The determining issue here ought to be whether he held significant political power. For example, we accord notability to mayors of major municipalities, members of provincial legislatures, etc, and the fact that the system of government was different and the post was hereditary is not relevant for Wikipedia. He is not required to have been sovereign ruler in his own right. That is without considering whether he would have been notable in his own time, and I find it inconceivable that he would not. --AJHingston (talk) 22:59, 25 December 2011 (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.