Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Adrienne, Duchess of Blekinge


 * 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 Per WP:SK, nomination withdrawn and no outstanding delete !votes. (non-admin closure) Sam Sailor 19:08, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

Princess Adrienne, Duchess of Blekinge

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP1E - subject of article is only known for, and been covered in regard to, one event: being born last month. Being tenth in line to the throne of Sweden does not pass WP:POLOUTCOMES as inherently notable. In fact, it would take a disaster of unimaginable proportions - one that has not occurred in the 200+ year history of the House of Bernadotte - for a 10er (or even a 5er or 4er) to actually ascend to the throne. (Ultimately, every living human is in the line of succession to the Swedish throne - how far down the list do we go?) No prejudice for future recreation of the article when Adrienne qualifies under the GNG. Chetsford (talk) 18:06, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, notable per WP:GNG, multiple non-trivial mentions in reliable sources. Like it or not, but a new prince or princess in the Swedish royal family will be the subject of several articles and news reports. I don't think that the nominator has done WP:BEFORE properly as I have no problems finding sufficient news coverage to meet WP:GNG. 19:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sjö (talk • contribs) 19:00, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * From BEFORE, it appears 100% of the references in RS are in relation to the subject's birth 29 days ago. Is this not the case of a person notable for WP:ONEEVENT? I can find no sources which report on the subject's activities, appearances, events, or achievements before or after 9 March 2018. Chetsford (talk) 21:17, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * You're misinterpreting WP:ONEEVENT. It says "When an individual is significant for his or her role in a single event, it may be unclear whether an article should be written about the individual, the event or both." So it talks about whether the article should be about the person or the event, or both. In this case, the person outweighs the event (the birth). WP:ONEEVENT doesn't say that a person is not notable just because he/she has only been involved in one event. --Marbe166 (talk) 23:01, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Also, as she is not a politician, I would argue that your references to WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:NPOL are moot. --Marbe166 (talk) 23:08, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, notable per WP:GNG, multiple non-trivial mentions in reliable sources. If we're only going to look at number in line to the Swedish throne, well, there are many further than tenth (the King's sisters, for example) who have pages (and which should not be deleted either). As one of the king and queen's grandchildren, Adrienne being less likely to ascend than Oscar or Estelle doesn't make her any less well known. As the daughter of Princess Madeleine, who has always been the center of much media attention, Adrienne has been notable since before her birth to a large population, like it or not. Perhaps her children will be the ones who don't count as inherently notable, as they will no longer be direct descendants of the crown, but Adrienne is still plenty notable. 19:35, 29 April 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tangyanzixuan (talk • contribs)
 * Yes, however, those other people qualify under the GNG as they have been covered in RS for more than WP:ONEEVENT. Adrienne has only received coverage for an event in which she was involved in on March 9. "Perhaps her children will be the ones who don't count as inherently notable, as they will no longer be direct descendants of the crown" - Here you make the argument that direct descent from the Crown of Sweden counts as inherent notability that trumps our policies on GNG/ONEEVENT. I've checked WP:NPOL and WP:POLOUTCOMES and can't find where direct descent from the Crown of Sweden has been set as a case of inherent notability - for my edification, can you point out where we've established that? Chetsford (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, per previous comments. Also, "every living human is in the line of succession to the Swedish throne" is completely false. The line ends with Adrienne, see Succession to the Swedish throne. --Marbe166 (talk) 22:42, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * "Also, "every living human is in the line of succession to the Swedish throne" is completely false. The line ends with Adrienne, see Succession to the Swedish throne." In general, and in this case specifically, Wikipedia is not a reliable source. If all direct descendants of Carl Gustaf died in a huge accident, Parliament has the authority to expand the line of succession to descendants of Karl XIV. Sweden doesn't just come to an end. Chetsford (talk) 23:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * The law (Sucessionsordningen) states that only descendants of Carl XVI Gustaf may inherit the throne. It says nothing about what happens should there be no such descendants. That means that should all 10 of them die, it would give the opportunity for the parliament to give the throne to someone else - anyone - not restricted to descendants of Karl XIV Johan, or to abolish the monarchy. --Marbe166 (talk) 23:27, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Correct. Parliament would have the authority to expand the line of succession to descendants of Karl XIV. Chetsford (talk) 00:14, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Or to anyone else. It is not limited to descendants of Karl XIV Johan. However, any such change is a constitutional change, which would require two parliamentary decisions, with an election inbetween. --Marbe166 (talk) 08:22, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Every human being is in line to the throne only in the same way that every human being is eligible to be president of the US, i.e. only after a (rather unlikely) constitutional change. Sjö (talk) 09:12, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, sounds like we're all agreed! Chetsford (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 18:08, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 18:08, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Chetsford (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep both per Marbe166 and the fact that WP:ONEEVENT and WP:LASTING are slowly breaking down, as more coverage has come since the birth (hardly the most "weighty" but no different in type than, say, Prince George was, and of equivalent notability). This will continue to happen, to at least a low degree. It doesn't need masses and masses of coverage to get in, so I think the article is fine. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:53, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Just a question for clarification - do you mean the WP policies are breaking down or there has been coverage about her activities beyond her birth? If the latter, could you provide some examples so I could consider withdrawing the AfD, if appropriate? Chetsford (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep, per Marbe166 and Nosebagbear. /Julle (talk) 11:14, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep and withdraw as nom. Per Nosebagbear, there has been coverage of Adrienne that has broken  today (specifically, reporting about activity on her Instagram account). While ONEEVENT may have applied yesterday or a few days ago, we're now in WP:BLP2E territory and the rationale for the nom is no longer relevant. Chetsford (talk) 18:04, 30 April 2018 (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.