Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michel, 14th Prince of Ligne

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 (non-admin closure) --LlamaAl (talk) 02:22, 23 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Michel, 14th Prince of Ligne

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

This person doesn't meet the general notability guidelines, no significant coverage from reliable secondary sources. Rotten regard 20:20, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not notable. Shorthate (talk) 23:45, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - He was Prince of the Holy Roman Empire. That is automatically notable. --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 00:40, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Query As the Holy Roman Empire ceased to exist about 200 years ago, how on earth can somebody nowadays be a prince of it? PatGallacher (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Query - I'm unclear - we have a page for Grandes de España (Grandees of Spain). The subject's article suggests he is Grandee of Spain but it is not clear as to whether he is a grandee (which would be covered by the GdE article) or the Grandee (is that even a separate title?). He does not seem to be listed at Grandes de España either way. But I'm also curious as to the above from PatGallacher - the vast majority of these hereditary titles were formally abolished by their various governments and people seem to carry them on out of self-aggrandisement or for lack of anything better to do. So is the subject a pretender? (Sorry, that should be pretender) What is he otherwise notable for? Other than having some famous relatives and having come down with an acute case of WP:INHERIT. Stalwart111 04:06, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cautious keep - Although I think we have too many articles on deposed royals and nobles, as far as I can make out the title Prince of Ligne does form part of the system of nobility of Belgium, an existing monarchy, so I think it passes nobility. We ought to investigate which of his titles are valid. PatGallacher (talk) 12:04, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree that Belgium being a monarchy contributes to the notability of members of a nobility without any constitutional role. It only means that those members of the royal family who are a few heartbeats from becoming head of state should be considered notable. I would apply the same argument to the UK, where those nobles who have had a constitutional role as members of the House of Lords are considered notable, but the rest are subject to the general notability guideline. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Although I am making some attempt to prune nobility-cruft on Wikipedia myself, there are dangers of overdoing it. In my view, the crucial distinction is between noble or royal titles which are still officially recognised by an actual government and those who are not, the latter are not automatically non-notable but there is no automatic presumption of notability and in a lot of cases they aren't. "Constitutional role" is open to interpretation, in the UK we might end up deciding that even such important figures as e.g. the Duke of Argyll are non-notable. PatGallacher (talk) 18:17, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep head of an important noble house, hopefully someone can translate into English the text from the French Wikipedia's article on him which is more detailed. - dwc lr (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep head of one of Belgium's historically most influential families. FactStraight (talk) 00:05, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The family may be historically influential, but has it been influential during Michel's time as prince? Phil Bridger (talk) 08:55, 20 December 2012 (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.