Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Maria of Romania
actually, as I posted on the nominator's page, the |past outcomes for these cases are not easy to categorize, and I am grateful that this nomination will give the community a chance to discuss the matter more fully.  About five years ago, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Maria Adelgunde of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen ended in "no consensus". I'd like to get |a new consensus to merge such articles to their parent's article, whomever is the heir apparent or the one pretender to the throne who is most recongnized by |reliable sources.  A deletion would remove blue links and some information valuable to our readership.  Keeping such trivia clutters our files and risks BLP violations and fights of competing pretenders and favourites (''No, Princess Lucinda, Countess Claudine Rhédey von Kis-Rhéde|Countess of Rhedy is the fourth in line to the Duchy of Grand Fenwick and her cousin Prince Oscar, Duke of Oldenburg, is fifth in line to the throne!!!'').  As HRH Jimbo, Prince of Wales, has stated, "There is usefulness in having a compete set of entries on hereditary peers, even if some peers are less prominent or noteworthy than others, even when the article must of necessity remain something of a stub. Considering these articles in isolation, i.e. not noting that they are part of a wider series, is mistaken...." (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Gordon, 7th Marquess of Aberdeen and Temair).  Jimbo was referring to peers of Great Britain, not disposed monarchs, but I think an analogy is appropriate.  I am not advocating keeping such stubs, however.  A merger is a nice compromise in the cases of hereditary ("fake") princelings; this AfD would make an excellent precedent, every lawyer's dream of an ''easy case'', so to do
— User:Bearian, 13:15, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Stance: merge
Cited policy: WP:OUTCOMES||WP:CCC||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Deletion policy)