Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/People Skipped From the British 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. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  23:50, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

People Skipped From the British Throne

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Original research or synthesised original research, plus a somewhat bizarre title. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 00:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * I just added a ref.What!?Why?Who? (talk) 00:50, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: They're already noted on Line of Succession to the British Throne. Craigy (talk) 01:13, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete concur that this is redundant--just a complement of the succession list. JJL (talk) 01:18, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Craigy. Tavix (talk) 02:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment This list begins with George Windsor. There are thousands of people who precede him genealogically but are skipped, i.e. all the descendants in the legitimate line of King Charles I.  The ancestors of these people were skipped in 1714, and so they are skipped today.  This list would more accurately be titled "Descendants of the Electress Sophia who are skipped ..." Noel S McFerran (talk) 05:16, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 09:21, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete for redundancy, the reference (which is all too vague) apparently having been imported from the "Line of succession..." article. Drmies (talk) 19:11, 16 January 2009 (UTC)


 * comment What if I get rid of the skipped on Line of Succession to the British Throne? Then would it be kept- that huge article is too big and people want to split it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by What!?Why?Who? (talk • contribs) 19:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Verify redundant, delete, and redirect -OR- do not delete, but redirect so verification can happen later. In any case, do not delete until it's known to be redundant.


 * 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.