Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Felix of Denmark

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. – NSR (talk) 06:22, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Prince Felix of Denmark

Unencyclopedic. Thin of noteworthiness. Has done nothing prominent, represents nothing important. All details can be put into his father's article. Just the fact that he was born a royal, does not suffice. Please realize that in addition, this boy is a younger son, thus not presumed to ever succeed to the Danish throne (barring unexpected events). I have earlier stated some thumb-rule criteria of royal babies having an own article, such as if the baby in question left a country in a succession crisis when dying. This boy could expect an own article when in his teens and gaining individual attention from media. Not yet. Otherwise, all the pertinent details of the baby in question fit into articles of parent(s), and an own article is undeserved. For encyclopedia, it is fragmenting to make these separate articles. 217.140.193.123 09:06, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or redirect to parent's page. Trollderella 19:53, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - this person is 4th in line to the Danish throne - it is befitting of a comprehensive encyclopedia to have an entry on him
• Keep notable. Dunc|☺ 20:20, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to father's page. And, it seems to me that there is very light and commonplace information in this article now. Arrigo 21:02, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I think monarchy should be abolished, but not on Wikipedia. In other words: In my eyes this prince is not inherently notable, but my POV is irrelevant in an encyclopedia. Punkmorten 21:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. He's fourth, or soon to be fifth in line to the Danish throne, which is still an important position. Lady Louise Windsor is eighth in line to the British throne, yet her article is still up. Morhange 00:06, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Verifiable article about someone of wider interest than thousands of people we have articles about. Osomec 00:19, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, echoing sentiments above. Dottore So 01:03, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Royal family members are inherently notable. 23skidoo 03:13, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep members of the royal family. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:05, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, as with his brother. Caerwine 22:34, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, gets lots of press in Denmark. Thue | talk 16:35, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep john k 16:28, 22 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.