Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Nicolas of Belgium

 :''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 Bizarre adventure. The AfD is being closed many years later, because it was never properly closed back then, because it was never visible, because it was never transcluded on any of the daily logpages. Technically, it has still been open this whole time.

Nobody else could ever be admitted here, because this door was made only for you. I am now going to shut it. jp×g 00:49, 18 October 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Prince Nicolas of Belgium

 * – (View AfD

I propose this article for deletion. The contents of the article include nothing encyclopedic. They are just personal details of a child recently born. Nor is it likely that within a couple of years, this subject will gain any encyclopedic content for his article. Thus, it is totally sufficient that this child is mentioned in his father's article.

The proposed guideline of notablity of royalty makes a difference if someone is among the ten first to succeed to an existing throne. They may be regarded as notable without any other merits. This child is not within ten first. We are in a slippery slope with that: if a person 13th in a line of succession (and without any encyclopedic content) preserves an article, then there comes editoirs, royalty watchers, who defend an article for some nonentity person purely on grounds that the said person is 200th in line of succession to some throne. Good editors have been in consensus about that limit of ten first. That's actually much, for including person who has no other merits, no other notability.

The case would be different if the subject had some other notability factors than just purely being a child 13th in line to some throne. For example, I am not proposing deletion of princess Alexandra of Kent as that person has much media coverage because of various represetntative activities. But it is certain that little Nicolas has no other media coverage than pure facts of birth, all such being easist to list in his father's article.

In a word, this aeticle as it is now, is simply ridiculous. Because it gives just baptismal names, birth moment, names of close relatives and godparents, and measures such as weight at birth. Totally non-encyclopedic. Shilkanni 20:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Someone (Shilkanni) has tagged Prince Nicolas of Belgium for deletion.

I strongly oppose, he's a member of the Belgian Royal family and Nicolas is currently 13th in the Line of succession to the Belgian Throne. He is a grandson of the ruling King of the Belgians and therefore not merely a "minor" noble. It would make him on par with for instance Princess Beatrice of York and nobody is proposing her deletion. -- fdewaele
 * Yes, you obviously oppose strongly. Where is this child's encyclopedic content necessary for an encyclopedia article. Shilkanni 20:46, 16 January 2007 (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.