Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raoul III of Valois


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

Raoul III of Valois

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article about a 11th century noble that appears to fail WP:GNG. There is currently not a consensus that noble status confers notability, and the sources that I could find are about genealogy and heirs or land he acquired by marriage. While I'm aware of recentism and try to avoid it, especially considering how difficult sources from this time period are to find, I believe that a 18th or 19th or 20th century noble with similar sources would likely fail the general notability guideline, and as such we shouldn't make an exception for an 11th century noble. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:15, 1 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I am curious if this article fails to meet notability, then should Renaud II, Count of Clermont-en-Beauvaisis which contains nothing but genealogical information(which was originally sourced by an unreliable website), also be deleted? --Kansas Bear (talk) 00:41, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Notability aside, we also have WP:NOTGENEALOGY which Renaud II arguably falls under Raoul III very well could as well. I think one of my larger concerns with medieval nobles is that a lot of what we have are mainly genealogy and property records, which I don't think rises to the level of meriting inclusion on its own. Again, understand the recentism concerns, but I'm also not convinced that being 1000 years old and being mentioned in a family tree merits inclusion. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:20, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for answering my question. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:43, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

While I generally agree about the genealogy issue, I think the more important point is that this article suffers from poor research and writing. A little bit of searching turned up some interesting facts including that this fellow was excommunicated because he repudiated his wife and married Anne of Kiev, widow of Henry I of France (and daughter of Yaroslav the Wise), and headed a resistance effort to the King of France. He and his son also warranted an mention in the Cambridge Medieval History, Volume 3. I think that an alternative to deletion would be to label it a stub and give interested readers a chance to fix it. Alternately, replace it with a translation of the associated French Wikipedia article, which is much better. Wolverine74 (talk) 15:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I saw the Cambridge source and the remarriage source, and both looked to be passing mentions to me more about the son and his second wife than about him. My concerns here are not just about the genealogy but also WP:GNG. This is an individual who we do have multiple passing mentions to in reliable sources. Do these mentions amount to what is needed to satisfy WP:BIO or GNG? I don't think so. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Well I guess you've made your mind up on this, so let's move on. First, we need to delete Herbert IV, Count of Vermandois, Raoul's son-in-law, since that article clearly doesn't meet the standards. And the article on Raoul's son Simon should also be deleted since he didn't do anything but inherit property and become a monk. As I'm looking at the Counts and Dukes of Valois, Drogo can also be deleted as can Adelaide. So the first 14 counts of Valois can be discounted, saving a lot of space. A great way to look at history. Wolverine74 (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:41, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Anne of Kiev per discussion above; this seems to be the most notable aspect of the subject's life. Anything useful can be picked up from the article history. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:45, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 08:54, 4 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. I think counts in medieval Europe are certainly notable enough individuals to have articles on. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:40, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - NOTGENEALOGY says, "Family histories should be presented only where appropriate to support the reader's understanding of a notable topic.", which doesn't really apply here as parents and children are generally considered a useful part of a biography and genealogy beyond that is not included. In general, though, counts and earls who controlled a significant amount of land (basically, all counts and earls during feudalism, I think), so a case could be made for notability based on WP:NPOL. But more seriously, counts and earls and people of higher royal and noble ranks are almost always going to satisfy GNG. In this case, note that he was also "Raoul IV of Vexin" and in English he is also called "Ralph". Searching google books for '(ralph OR raoul) (vexin OR valois OR crepy) 1074' (1074 was the year of his death) as here gives a number of additional reliable in-depth sources. I think a creative search for Herbert of Vermandois and most counts and earls (and higher) would find them to be GNG as well. Smmurphy(Talk) 17:42, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. He is mentioned in The Cambridge Medieval History, Volume 3, p. 111. One of the difficulties in researching an 11th-century figure is the variety of names he may go by. This Raoul may also be called Ralph, Radulf and Rodulf. Likewise, he was count of not only Valois, but also the Véxin, Crépy, Bar-sur-Aube, Vitry and other places. Srnec (talk) 01:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * How extensively is the subject mentioned in The Cambridge Medieval History? K.e.coffman (talk) 07:16, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I believe this is the page that Srnec is referring to . TonyBallioni (talk) 14:55, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * He is mentioned once in the CMH. The CMH is a general history covering all of Europe and 1000 years. You would not expect most "genealogical placeholders" to get mentioned at all. I am going to expand the article later today. I have several sources to add. The most extensive are David Bates, "Lord Sudeley's ancestors: the family of the counts of Amiens, Valois and the Vexin in France and England during the 11th century", in The Sudeleys – Lords of Toddington (Manorial Record Soc. of Great Britain, 1987), pp. 34–48, and P. Feuchère, "Une tentative manquée de concentration territoriale entre Somme et Seine: la principauté d'Amiens-Valois au XIe siècle", in Le Moyen Âge, 40 (1954), pp. 1–37. Also, note that the sources are not in agreement on the numbering of the counts of Valois. The count in question, who died in 1074, is more often called Ralph IV. Srnec (talk) 21:31, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * , If the sources can be added to expand, I'm fine withdrawing the AfD after it is done. The sources I saw up until this point did not convince me it met GNG (including Cambridge), but it looks like you have multiple pages of information on him in several books. That meets GNG if it is correct, and I'd be happy to withdraw because of that if changes his redirect !vote. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)


 * CMH is an extremely passing mention, and does not indicate if the subject has done anything significant to warrant a stand-alone article. Notability is not inherited from a notable spouse (Anne of Kiev) or a better known offspring (Simon de Crépy, who is covered in a lot more detail in CMH). I'd be happy to re-evaluate my ivote if the article improves beyond "Raoul immediately begins pillaging Joigny's county" which seems like a fairly routine activity for a count of that time period. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:06, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, same, my offer to withdraw was based on seeing what could be added to the article from the RS. Sorry if not clear. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I have expanded the article. And I haven't even touched the Feuchère source yet. My point about CMH was that a passing mention in such a work is probably the tip of the iceberg, so to speak. Part of the problem is a lack of a standard way of referring to somebody like Ralph. You could also call him Radulf or Rodulf. Or Raoul, as we currently do, although I think we should move the page to Ralph IV of Valois. The numbering varies between III and IV and he may be called a count of Valois, Crépy, Amiens or Montdidier, since he was all of those (and more). Srnec (talk) 03:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per article improvements by ; nice job! K.e.coffman (talk) 20:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn per 's masterful work! TonyBallioni (talk) 20:52, 6 January 2017 (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.