Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Moulay Ismail of Morocco


 * 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   speedy keep. Per WP:SK criterion 1. Nominator is now desiring a redirect, and there are no outstanding delete !votes. Merging/redirecting can be discussed on the article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 01:10, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Prince Moulay Ismail of Morocco

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

person does not meet notability requirements Pevernagie (talk) 18:00, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep – Based on Notability (royalty). I know this is a contentious opinion, with both sides making valid points.  However, when we look at individuals with notability, we typically do not look as attained through achievements but rather through birth when regarding Royalty.  If that was not the case, how could we justify articles about Prince William of Wales or Prince Harry of Wales or even Prince Charles.  In that  Prince Moulay is both legitimate and recognized by Morocco as the crowned prince, who are we to say no.  Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 18:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Notability (royalty) failed to reach consensus and is thus not an argument. Pevernagie (talk) 17:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That is why I stated that it was a; “…contentious opinion”. However, that does not disqualify the argument.  Opinions are just that, Opinions, and all are taken with a grain of salt.  Mine especially.  Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 03:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - titled member of a reigning royal family. Name of article needs to change though. Edgepedia (talk) 21:21, 19 October 2009 (UTC) I was wrong about the name of the article. It seems that Prince and Princess titles are allowed.
 * Keep per Edgepedia above. - DustFormsWords (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Shoesss. Edward321 (talk) 13:55, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete – All the information on this page can easily be put on his father's page. At the moment the article does not provide enough material to justify keeping it. Pevernagie (talk) 17:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment – Are you sure you mean delete? Not merge/redirect?  The reason I bring that up is that a delete erases any and all references to the individual.  In other words, if a visitor to Wikipedia typed in the individuals name, there would be no article or a direction to an article that addresses that individual.  However, if we merge/redirect, that same visitor would be taking to the father’s page where the information would be available.  ShoesssS Talk 17:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Very well, redirect. Pevernagie (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Per Shoes and Edge. Warrah (talk)
 * Strong Keep: Shoesss, You have been doing great work. - Ret.Prof (talk) 01:12, 21 October 2009 (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.