Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia (born 1982)




 * 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 to delete. After extended time for discussion, there is a clear absence of consensus, and no reason to expect that further discsussion will yield a consensus. BD2412 T 02:59, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Prince Alexander of Yugoslavia (born 1982)

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

Deposed monarch cruft. PatGallacher (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC) There has already been a lot of deposed monarchy cruft deleted on Wikipedia, this is another example. This person was never officially a prince, he was born into a former royal family after it was deposed, he is not even a notable pretender. PatGallacher (talk) 19:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 15:36, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 19:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep – Members of the former ruling families of Brazil, Mexico, Iran, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, France (Bourbon, Orléans, Bonaparte), Georgia, Greece, Montenegro, Portugal, Romania, Russia, Italy (Savoy, Bourbon-Two Sicilies, Austria-Este, Bourbon-Parma, Habsburg-Lorraine), Prussia, Bavaria, Hanover, Saxony, Hesse, Oldenburg, Brunswick, Schleswig-Holstein, and even Hawai'i still (to varying degrees--the Hawai'ians and Habsburgs are less keen) use their former titles; in many cases "prince" and "princess", sometimes "duke", "archduke", etc.; even though the last reigning monarchs produced by their families died 100+ years ago. Not only is continuing to use a title once officially held by your family as a mark of recognition for their place in history not "simply not done", it's more common today than actually being officially entitled to such a senior title by virtue of a close, living relative of yours being a reigning monarch. Besides that, Alexander was in the line of the succession to the British throne before the rule was changed Source 1 Source 2. The UK officially recognizes him as a prince. --DragonFederal (talk) 06:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The line of succession to the British throne is believed to consist of several thousand people. However it's not clear that he is in it, as a Serb he is probably Greek Orthodox.  Different views about whether they were in the line of succession was one reason why we decided to drastically prune the article on this issue. PatGallacher (talk) 13:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. All sourcing comes from tabloids. The article fails to demonstrate notability (actually, it's a clear case of WP:NOTINHERITED); if there was a rule that we have to have an article about all members of deposed royal families, no matter what they have done in their lives, I must have missed it. No such user (talk) 07:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. An insignificant person who has not done anything notable. I don't count dating Dunja Kusturica as doing something notable. As for being in the line of the succession to the British throne, so are millions of other people, including me.  Athel cb (talk) 08:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete it is time to free Wikipedia from deposed monarchy cruft, and that is what this article is. Even members of ruling families are not default notable for existing, we need to have actual reliable source coverage about them. But to think that people from a whole slew of places that removed the monarchy decades before the person was born are notable enough to have an article for that fact alone is not justifiable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep First, WP:ITSCRUFT is not a valid argument. Second, besides the sources about him dating Dunja Kusturica 1 and 2 already present on the page, there are also other significant coverage of him elsewhere: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. These alone are enough to satisfy WP:GNG. StellarHalo (talk) 01:54, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. --IndexAccount (talk) 19:13, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per my usual standards for nobility. In this case, there's been more than sufficient coverage, primarily for who he's dated (woman, and, now it appears, men). Bearian (talk) 20:23, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Reply WP:ITSCRUFT is only an essay, not a rigid guideline. IMHO "deposed monarchy cruft" is a valid argument, but we can discuss this further.  Bearian's personal standards of nobility are only one person's opinion.  Who someone might have dated is really trivial, Wikipedia is not a gossip column, may even raise BLP issues. PatGallacher (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Also it's not clear that this person does meet Bearian's personal standards of notability. PatGallacher (talk) 12:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep "All sourcing comes from tabloids" is a non-argument. There is plenty of news coverage here, enough to meet WP:GNG. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 12:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Easily enough sourcing to meet WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:22, 8 June 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.