Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Margaretha of Liechtenstein


 * 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   keep. postdlf (talk) 16:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Princess Margaretha of Liechtenstein

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Apparently, the only thing notable about this woman is that she is a member of two currently reigning dynasties - a double princess, one might say. Until I nominated it for deletion, the article stated that she had "no official state role" and that she only attended weddings and "other family events". I have been editing articles about royals for years and this made wonder if she is notable at all. I tried Googling, hoping that I would find information about her that would help me expand and improve the article, but there simply isn't any. She is a patron of an apparently equally unnotable organization and that's it. She did not inherit notability from her father, her husband or her brother-in-law. She is no more notable than Sarah Obama, who presumably also "attends weddings and other family events". Simply being titled does not make her notable either. There are probably tens of thousands of people with legally recognized titles, ranging from knight/dame to prince/princess. The title alone does not make them notable. The Princely House of Liechtenstein is Europe's largest royal house, having more than 100 members. Given that Liechtenstein itself is so small, it's no wonder that a vast of majority of its princes and princesses function as private citizens, working as bankers, businesspeople, tourism entrepreneurs, etc. Surtsicna (talk) 09:20, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:07, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:07, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Luxembourg-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:10, 15 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep Can't find any particular pieces of information that would fully satisfy WP:BIO. Sources point to weddings and again pictures of minor events and functions. All the other Grand Duke have article for the children, so it would be a bit silly to delete such a lovely article. scope_creep talk 20:00, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Other crap exists. The articles about her siblings are completely irrelevant, but while we're discussing them, it should be noted that they at least resemble proper biographies. We don't have articles about all her in-laws, because not all of them are public figures. Margaretha is not a public figure. She has no constitutional position, no state role, no "royal duties". Margaretha is a private citizen. Surtsicna (talk) 09:44, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep Margaretha is not a private person. She is unique in Europe, perhaps the last of the tradition of women who have contracted international dynastic marriages, holding the dual status of being legally princesses of two reigning dynasties in Europe's seven remaining monarchies. That differentiates her not only from the alleged "tens of thousands" of persons who "hold" noble (not royal) titles, but even from those who belong by birth or marriage to reigning families. Unlike the relatives of elected officials temporarily elevated to the limelight, she: is eligible to inherit one throne and her son to inherit another; holds rare legal titles; receives coverage in news, books and on government websites (see the article's sources) by virtue of that status; her marriage and those of her children require the legal approval of the head of state, unlike those of any other persons in their respective nations and unlike those of celebrities or politicians' relatives. WP:NOTINHERITED is a guideline, not a policy, and is subject to both dissent and exceptions; we are not obliged to apply it and in this unique case, at the very least, I think there are grounds for considering it an exception. Too much of the criticism directed at this article is of unsourced material already removed: this article is well-sourced. FactStraight (talk) 13:21, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That she is "unique in Europe" has only been noted by you, as far as I know. Please correct me if an historian or genealogist noted the same. I disagree with your assertion that she is eligible to inherit a throne. She is not and has never been eligible to succeed to the throne of Luxembourg. Until very recently, succession rights were vested in patrilineal descendants of Grand Duke William IV's daughters. Had Charlotte's male line failed, the crown would have passed to the heirs male of her sisters, in priority of birth, and not Charlotte's female descendants. There is no scenario under which Margaretha could have inherited it. As for coverage in news, books and government websites - it can easily be seen that she is mentioned only in passing. Half the sources in the article deal with genealogy, not with Margaretha herself. I would really like this article to be improved enough to be worth keeping, which is why I've contributed to it, but it does not seem to have the potential because its subject is not a public figure or notable for anything (except, in your opinion, for holding titles). Surtsicna (talk) 14:18, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Nothing notable about subject. No coverage other then casual mention if she happened to be at a function being covered.  Being a princess in two royal families is TRIVIA without RS to show otherwise. Caffeyw (talk) 08:29, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep She is notable enough. Lietchenstein has many living royals but Luxembourg does not and as long as there are reliable source and coverage of the figure, she is notable. --The Emperor&#39;s New Spy (talk) 06:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:05, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

 Keep - As members of an American meritocracy, we look at members of these European royal families derisively as effete, because they have little to nothing in the way of individual accomplishments to recommend them and claim notability solely by birthright. We fail to appreciate their inherent and notable function in their own societies as national figureheads and social coherent, specially, in a small principality like Leichtenstein. This is a highly ethnocentric and myopic focus. 64.134.102.201 (talk) 02:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)Tammytoons
 * Why on Earth would you assume that we are all "members of an American meritocracy" and therefore "ethnocentric"? That insults me. Your comment immediately reminded me of "you're a train spotter so what would you know about fashion?" kind of argument. For what it's worth, I am European. I don't fail to appreciate Margaretha's "inherent and notable function" because there isn't any to appreciate. She is not a national figurehead and, as I have shown, she has no notable function in any society. If she had, there would be plenty of RS confirming it. Surtsicna (talk) 10:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the comment is directed at Tammytoons' fellow U.S. residents and is intended to encourage them to be more respectful of the diversity in styles of governance European democracies reflect, including constitutional monarchies. If that shoe doesn't fit you, you needn't put it on. FactStraight (talk) 19:01, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Margaretha is one of five members of the royal family for which the government of Luxembourg has issued bios PER THIS. That's good enough for me, I think, to demonstrate that this is a public figure worthy of encyclopedic biography. The dual dynasties thing is an added hook. Carrite (talk) 03:21, 27 August 2013 (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.