Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the French throne (Bonapartist)


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 19:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Line of succession to the French throne (Bonapartist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unsourced. DrKiernan (talk) 16:32, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Lacks any references.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:21, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep yes its unsourced and needs work but there will be sources out there if people look for them. The succession rules can be cited to the constitution for example. - dwc lr (talk) 17:23, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * A source from 1804 can never be used to claim that people alive today "claim the title of emperor and want to reestablish the monarchy instead of the republic as a form of government". DrKiernan (talk) 17:27, 22 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article leads to a substantial number of bluelinked articles about the series of Bonapartist pretenders.  I've looked at some of those articles and they seem to have plenty of sources. It seems to me that, if nothing else, this article provides necessary organization for those. Someone trying to find the right pretender would be rather adrift without some kind of article like this one that organizes all those claimants in dynastic order. --Arxiloxos (talk) 17:44, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * There's a list of members at House of Bonaparte. This isn't about whether there should be a list somewhere; it's about this article. DrKiernan (talk) 18:02, 22 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:14, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Being unsourced is not reason for deletion. There's a lot of books and articles on the subject, such as:
 * Joseph Valynseele, Le sang des Bonaparte, 1954
 * Laetitia de Witt, Le prince Victor Napoléon, Fayard, 2007
 * F. Billaut, « Guerre de succession chez les Napoléon », Point de Vue, 16 December 1997
 * Frédéric Bluche, Le bonapartisme, Paris, PUF, 1980
 * The Valynseele book seems to be the standard history of the Bonapartes. A merge might be possible but I'll leave someone else to propose and carry that out.--Colapeninsula (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep The article is notable per above. Add the sources listed, and the article will be fine.Spirit of Eagle (talk) 06:17, 28 February 2014 (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.