Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Line of succession to the former throne of Württemberg

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. Monty ₈₄₅ 16:04, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Line of succession to the former throne of Württemberg[edit]

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

Not encyclopedic, obscure issue, the current line of succession (as opposed to some historical issues) is completely unsourced, the issues here may be rather similar to Line of succession to the former Tuscan throne. PatGallacher (talk) 21:37, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep relevant topic relating to a notable royal house, James Pope-Hennessy talks about the succession to Württemberg in his book Queen Mary and why the Teck's were not the next heirs. Article could be sourced better. - dwc lr (talk) 00:39, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per dwc lr. Lots of sources list the members of this family and the rules governing the order of succession. FactStraight (talk) 09:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

We await it being sourced better then. At present the article contains a significant amount of unsourced material about living people, a no-no on Wikipedia. PatGallacher (talk) 03:23, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

James Pope-Hennesey's book on Queen Mary was published in 1959, so it can hardly be much of a guide to the line of succession now. I question if sources which list the members of the family are being updated with births and deaths all that regularly. One source which does explain the House Rules affecting the order of succession mentions that members of the family were supposed to take part in equal marriages, interpreting this is a veritable minefield. Turning all these sources into a line of succession is an example of synthesis and original research, see WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. PatGallacher (talk) 21:02, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pope-Hennesey discusses a historic issue relating to the succession. Re equal marriages one recent Genealogisches Handbuch des Adels,Fürstliche Häuser edition lists Württemberg and an unequal marriage (Duke Michael to Julia Storz) was recognised & approved by the head of the house so no interpreting is needed. - dwc lr (talk) 12:20, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the Genealogisches Handbuch des Adels listed in the sources. This still leaves the point about synthesis. PatGallacher (talk) 12:49, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources like Genealogisches Handbuch des Adels and others list the dukes in succession order (in primogeniture) so no synthesis is needed. - dwc lr (talk) 12:58, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It's not enough to make vague statements about "other sources". If you are referring to the Almanach de Gotha, it may or may not be a reliable source, but we need to know e.g. which edition, preferably page numbers. PatGallacher (talk) 13:18, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Almanach de Gotha, Petit Gotha, GHdA they all follow the same format. - dwc lr (talk) 13:36, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You still have some responsibility to add the source to the article. PatGallacher (talk) 14:53, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe one day I can get around to improving some of these articles. Unfortunately royalty articles like this could do with help but the emphasis seems to be on deleting them rather than looking into improving them. - dwc lr (talk) 15:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see the same tendency. Whereas these articles can easily be salvaged by listing the dynasty, its rules of succession, the persons to whom the rules apply as listed in reliable sources, and those sources -- even without the list of succession in cases where that isn't precisely sourced. In this case of the Royal House of Wurttemberg, for instance: the head of house is identified, members of the family as of publication date are listed in order of their births, whether or not each was born of a dynastically approved marriage is stated, and the rules of succession are explained, for instance, on pages 179-184, 600 in the Furstliche Hauser Band XVI of Genealogisches Handbuch des Adels, published Germany 2001; and on pages 134-165 in Le Petit Gotha by Chantal de Badts and Guy Coutant de Saisseval, published France 2000. FactStraight (talk) 02:35, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This has been added to the Germany, Politics, and Lists of people deletion forums. PatGallacher (talk) 12:09, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (possibly renamed and pruned). It is clear that the present claimant uses the title "Duke of Wurtemberg". Accordingly the article is in fact qabout the succession to that title. We have articles on all British peerages, I therefore see no reason why we should not have them on their German equivalents. This contrasts with Italy, where (I think) all noble titles have been abolished by law. Poissibly rename and repurpose. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:54, 8 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.