Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of popes from the Medici family


 * 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 no consensus. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000(talk) 23:17, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

List of popes from the Medici family

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

These lists are already part of the lead sections of House of Medici, Conti di Segni and House of Borgia, respectively. They are also much more elaborated in those respective articles than in these lists. Having this lists separate from the articles seems redundant. Nothing to merge so I propose we just delete them. Feed back  ☎ 17:28, 22 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Plenty of sourced content for these historical articles. There's no reason to delete them per se, but an editorial decision to turn them into redirects and/or summary style breakouts might be appropriate, per WP:ATD. Jclemens (talk) 07:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment. We could redirect to their respective family pages, I suppose. I think articles like List of popes from the Borgia family, for example, is an unwieldy title and guarantees it will only ever be a short bullet point list that duplicates what is already at Borgia. But an article at Borgia popes, the collective impact of which has been written about extensively so as to free us from WP:SYNTH issues, would be a great addition. That title current redirects to the list. I think it should be the other way around. It would allow them to be listed anyway and I think it would make for a good content fork from the family article. Not everything has to be listified. Thoughts? Stalwart 111  12:17, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge into family articles. The Medici case names the popes but not in a table.  The table migfht usefully be added to House of Medici (as a new section).  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Merging would be appropriate if it weren't for the fact that all the popes are mentioned in the lead sections of each family article. I guess if you think it's appropriate we restate them in list-form at the end of each article, then merging would be the way to go. Feed  back  ☎ 17:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar   &middot;   &middot;  17:29, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2013 (UTC)




 * Redirect' or merge and redirect, don't care, but we don't need lists when they're covered in the family articles quite nicely. Osiris (talk) 03:03, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge As others have commented, the Medici popes are a sufficiently notable topic in their own right that we need to ensure that users can readily locate them. Whilst they are mentioned in the narrative of the Medici article they may not be immediately obvious at first glance. It has a long lead and a substantial article, so they need flagging in an appropriate section. The Conti and Borgia articles are different, but both would benefit by clear signposting especially in the case of theSegni where their notability stems mainly from the fact that they did produce five popes - that article is little more than a stub and a listing would give clarity. Conti popes should be added as a redirect. --AJHingston (talk) 11:26, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep alll The Medici especially--that;s's a rather generally known matter of interest. For the others, the main thing that is needed is expansion. &#39;DGG (at NYPL) (talk) 21:21, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to respective family articles that already include this data. -- 202.124.72.19 (talk) 12:53, 10 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep all If the Medici Popes page is a keeper, this one is too. Yes, Medici Popes are of greater scholarly interest, but there is often confusion regarding how many Popes were Borgias and which ones were which.  I recently had an argument with someone on just that, and this convenient list cleared the matter up.  Redirecting to the verbose Borgias page would have taken more time to sift through.  Also, the title "List of popes from the medici family" may be long but typing in "Borgia popes" gets you here too.  This list is convenient as well as consistent with the Medici Popes page.Krshwunk (talk) 11:55, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep all. Not sure exactly why these were nominated. Bearian (talk) 21:22, 16 July 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.