Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cassar Desain
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. dbenbenn | talk 22:24, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Cassar Desain[edit]
More genealogy, consisting of a literal quote from a book (but it says, 'used with permission' so not sure if it's copyvio) Radiant! 13:02, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, genealogy, possible copyvio, reads as if there's an underlying political agenda. Wyss 17:09, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as above. Brookie 18:43, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: User:Tancarville has written tons of these articles about Maltese nobility, all copied from a website which he claims to own. RickK 20:45, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
- We should form a consensus on all of them, then. I hold that WP is not a genealogy db, and possible copyvio. Radiant! 11:46, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Mmm, to a degree. I would say that Maltese nobility are not intrinsically notable; but I am sure there are some Maltese nobility who are notable. While an opinion that Maltese nobility are not intrinsically notable would be a Good Thing, I hope it doesn't lead to the deletion of articles where notability actually DOES exist for independent reasons. (Interestingly, we had this debate about UK peers a couple of days back and there seemed to be a lot of opinion - which I disagreed with - that being a UK peer is intrinsically notable.) TSP 15:32, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- We should form a consensus on all of them, then. I hold that WP is not a genealogy db, and possible copyvio. Radiant! 11:46, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: Not a copyvio if the author is who he claims to be, which I see no reason to doubt. The issue is perhaps whether he really wants to release it under GFDL and accept the edits of others. And the "by permission" thing should be on the talkpages. /u p p l a n d 17:29, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Additional comment as to notability: Aristocratic families (i.e. not the petty nobility of low-level officers and civil servants that exists in most of Europe) are almost always somewhat notable because of landownership, patronage of churches etc and the political significance of their relationships. In most cases at least a few members were notable in themselves. But this article is not really written in encyclopedic style, lacks wikilinks and other things which would put things better in context. The important individuals should be in articles of their own, the others could perhaps be mentioned in passing in an shorter article on the family (more like the British peerage articles). I wish the author would spend some time cleaning up his articles and adapting them to Wikipedia style. / u p p l a n d 18:08, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.