Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of heirs to the Portuguese throne


 * 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. The problems with the sourcing have not been addressed conclusively in the discussion Spartaz Humbug! 16:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I have been asked to expand my reasoning, firstly we start with a nomination that tells us this is an unsourced list with concerns about OR and invalid claims. Then I look at the votes and compare them to policy. We get keep votes acknowledging the lack of sources and problems with content but it looks ok. Then we see a strong argument threading through the discussion that large sections have been made up based on criteria that did not exist at the time, That is pretty fatal to any article and has not been countered in the keep arguments. Finally there is a suggestion to use the PT article to find sources but the impression I got was that these sources were already rejected when an earlier discussion was a delete. Overall then, there are serious issues with OR that have not been countered. No serious argument about how this should be sourced and that was pretty much that. I think in retrospect I’m think this is more of a TNT job then an outright rejection of the concept of the page but if it is to be recreated then we need a proper scholarly source for each entry to avoid the OR coming back in. Spartaz Humbug! 07:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

List of heirs to the Portuguese throne

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

No citations. Earlier entries, such as Sophia and Ingeborg of Denmark are dubious at best and probably fanciful in the sense that they were never considered heirs. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Royalty and nobility. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:10, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions. North America1000 14:07, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep A (possible) few of errors in a long list is a reason to edit not to delete. Yes it lacks sources, but still it does not look like being made up, but only the result of sloppy editing. (I am Portuguese) - Nabla (talk) 01:17, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources and extensively made-up. DrKay (talk) 18:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - There hasn't been a Portuguese throne, since 1910. Best to discourage such lists. GoodDay (talk) 20:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * comment Should we delete most articles on History? - Nabla (talk) 02:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * This isn't history. It's mostly fiction. DrKay (talk) 07:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete – A list of heirs and pretenders to a throne that was abolished over a century ago is not noteworthy. Drdpw (talk) 00:36, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment - We've quite a few of these defunct throne lists. See - Austrian, French, Greek, Italian, Prussian, Saxe Coburg-Gotha thrones. Scottish & English thrones, are trickier. GoodDay (talk) 05:28, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep There's obviously going to be significant coverage of the heirs to the throne of any country. In this case, see 1, 2. We can distinguish between the real heirs and "pretender heirs" in the lead, and emphasise that the Portuguese throne is now defunct, to address the POV concerns raised above. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 05:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not able to find any coverage of the Danish heirs in those sources, which are about the monarchy of Portugal not this topic. It's not just the pretenders that are a problem. The medieval sections are largely made-up by applying succession law that did not exist at the time. DrKay (talk) 07:01, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 21:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - most of the article is about heirs apparent to the throne, not pretenders. I am far from sure that the inclusion of heirs apparent to pretenders is useful.  Perhasp prune.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - the pretenders can be removed immediately, there's no Portuguese throne now but there was one in the past, medieval entries can be contested without purging the article wholesale. --Killuminator (talk) 19:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep, the issues raised by the nominator can be dealt with using translated content and sources from the portuguese wikipedia SailingInABathTub 🛁 22:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * That would be contrary to WP:G4, since it would recreate an article that has already been deleted: Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former Portuguese throne, . DrKay (talk) 08:06, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I have not proposed to recreate an identical copy of a deleted article. SailingInABathTub 🛁 11:36, 18 August 2022 (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.