Deletion of Robert de Bruges

Comment: Ref 1 indicates that he did exist and was castellan of Bruges in 1054.  Everything else is pure specualtion, which in WP, we call .  In this case the OR is not by the WP editors, but the compiler of an external website (Ref2).  The choices are (1) Delete (2) reduce to the statement about his existence and "some researchers have suggested him as a remote ancestor of the Robert Bruce".  At this remote period biographic (and genealogical) details are often sketchy (or non-existent).  Unless there is something substantial to say about him, I would suggest he is NN and the article should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: Significant  problems, as pointed by the nominator. In any event, insufficient evidence for passing either  or 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:N||WP:BIO)