| Revision as of 11:31, 4 January 2025 editPetri Krohn (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,094 edits Keep← Previous edit | Revision as of 11:32, 4 January 2025 edit undoPetri Krohn (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users37,094 editsm typoNext edit → | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
| *<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ] lists for the following topics: ], ], and ]. ] (]) 11:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)</small> | *<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ] lists for the following topics: ], ], and ]. ] (]) 11:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Keep''' Verifiably notable noble family in encyclopedias, eg {{cite Efron|Оболенские, княжеский род}}. Wiipedians simply don't care. --] ] 18:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' Verifiably notable noble family in encyclopedias, eg {{cite Efron|Оболенские, княжеский род}}. Wiipedians simply don't care. --] ] 18:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' Noble families, especially princely families are by definition notable, as their members are listed in official genealogies and studied by multitude of genealogists. It is irrelevant if the princes Obolensky were actually descendants of ], Imperial Russia considered them as such, as exemplified by their use of the title prince and their inclusion in the ]. <br/>I read Nederlandse Leeuw's rant on ]. It reads like an anti-royalist, French revolutionary attack on nobility in general. Unfortunately the ] was non-egalitarian. Social status and thus notability followed family lines. There are corresponding family articles is six other languages. The Russian language article list about 30 family members with Misplaced Pages articles. The ] has 106 articles and 15 subcategories. -- ] (]) 11:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' Noble families, especially princely families are by definition notable, as their members are listed in official genealogies and studied by multitude of genealogists. It is irrelevant if the princes Obolensky were actually descendants of ], Imperial Russia considered them as such, as exemplified by their use of the title prince and their inclusion in the ]. <br/>I read Nederlandse Leeuw's rant on ]. It reads like an anti-royalist, French revolutionary attack on nobility in general. Unfortunately the '']'' was non-egalitarian. Social status and thus notability followed family lines. There are corresponding family articles is six other languages. The Russian language article list about 30 family members with Misplaced Pages articles. The ] has 106 articles and 15 subcategories. -- ] (]) 11:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 11:32, 4 January 2025
Obolensky
New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Obolensky (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Follow-up to Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Khilkov (recently unanimously deleted). WP:UNSOURCED WP:OR, fails WP:GNG. Rule of thumb: if a Russian noble family claims descent from Rurik without a source, that's a red flag. (No objection to keeping Category:Obolensky family for now; this "article" just adds nothing of value). NLeeuw (talk) 11:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people, Royalty and nobility, and Russia. NLeeuw (talk) 11:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Verifiably notable noble family in encyclopedias, eg
"Оболенские, княжеский род" . Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (in Russian). 1906.. Wiipedians simply don't care. --Altenmann >talk 18:36, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
- Keep Noble families, especially princely families are by definition notable, as their members are listed in official genealogies and studied by multitude of genealogists. It is irrelevant if the princes Obolensky were actually descendants of Rurik, Imperial Russia considered them as such, as exemplified by their use of the title prince and their inclusion in the Velvet Book.
I read Nederlandse Leeuw's rant on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Khilkov. It reads like an anti-royalist, French revolutionary attack on nobility in general. Unfortunately the Ancien Régime was non-egalitarian. Social status and thus notability followed family lines. There are corresponding family articles is six other languages. The Russian language article list about 30 family members with Misplaced Pages articles. The corresponding category has 106 articles and 15 subcategories. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 11:30, 4 January 2025 (UTC)