Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concubine En

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 redirect to Jiaqing Emperor. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concubine En

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Merge and Redirect to Jiaqing Emperor. Article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. My WP:BEFORE turned up nothing, but I will happily change my vote to keep if anyone can find WP:RS to establish WP:N. // Timothy :: talk 15:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 15:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 15:07, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect and merge info per above. // Timothy :: talk 15:09, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This vote is come from nominator TimothyBlue, he voted for two times! Cape Diamond MM (talk) 07:11, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No I !voted once. The original nomination will show up as a delete !vote in scripts or stat tools such as afdstats. I overroad that by placing redirect in the !voting section. No one would think its two !votes. // Timothy :: talk 07:22, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Royalty are always notable. But this AfD needs help from Chinese speaking-editor, Dear Cunard Can you finds source for this royal concubine? I think she was played a important role in royal affairs. Thanks Cape Diamond MM (talk) 14:03, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please provide a source for "Royalty are always notable" and for the assertion that a concubine is considered royalty in this particular harem system? Thanks. // Timothy :: talk 17:31, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please kindly read Bearian's User:Bearian/Standards#Notability of Consorts of nobility Cape Diamond MM (talk) 18:20, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I noted three things. 1) It is referring to Consorts, not Concubines and these are different positions (see sources in Imperial Chinese harem system), 2) This is an essay which can be helpful, but its an opinion not a guideline or policy, 3) It says "almost always notable" not "always notable". // Timothy :: talk 18:39, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The only people who are always notable are actual heads of state. Everyone else is somewhere under being "always" notable, and considering the number of concubines some emperors had, claims that concubines are default notable are just plain absurd.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Johnpacklambert, lack of WP:RS, and WP:MILL. Emperors of China had dozens, sometimes hundreds, of concubines. There's nothing in the article to indicate anything special about her. The only two sources are in print, and can't be evaluated as to their reliability. Bearian (talk) 15:37, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We should wait comments from Chinese editor. Because her biography available on Baidu. Cape Diamond MM (talk) 15:39, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wikipedia is not a repository of all the people appearing in noble genealogy books. JoelleJay (talk) 21:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.