Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elisabeth Ferner Beckman

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 Delete all. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elisabeth Ferner Beckman, Benjamin Ferner Beckman, Benedikte Ferner

subject is approx 80th in line to the british throne and something in the Norwegian house. I also nominate for deletion the page on her son, Benjamin Ferner Beckman, and als o that of her sister Benedikte Ferner. Ohconfucius 03:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all distant relationship to royalty is not notable. Opabinia regalis 04:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All I think we need to combine all these silly distant relatives of distant relatives of distant relatives of the British throne articles into one gigantoid AFD and purge the lot. — NM Chico24 04:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Wryspy 04:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the problem with having one big AfD is that there's someone in the list that some editor thinks is vaguely notable and the whole discussion gets so complex that no concensus can be reached. Dlyons493 Talk 11:23, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, they are not famous or something. Besides, they are not in the first 40 on the line of succession to the British throne. --Ter e nce Ong _{(Chat | Contribs)} 12:49, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Ran out of words from all of the above royalty nominations. StuffOfInterest 13:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- I would Redirect to Line of succession to the British Throne everybody under #100 in line with no independent claim of notability. NawlinWiki 14:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Am getting mildly irritated with so many AfDs on the same thing. - Aksi_great (talk - review me) 14:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all to Princess Astrid of Norway per comments made on the other AfDs on this subject. --Core des at talk. ^_^ 22:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Princess Astrid of Norway per my comment in the above AfD. --e ivind ^t ^@^c 22:46, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Princess Astrid of Norway, where family members of notable people belong LinaMishima 23:26, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per other articles nominated by same user -- Roleplayer 02:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn Matthew Fenton (Talk | Contribs) 11:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as previous, if 39th is far as Brenda's website goes (here) why should we go further ? WP:NOT a genealogy database or Burke's Peerage. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:32, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per my comments on the earlier batches of pseudo-distant-royal-ish-folks. Carlossuarez46 06:27, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Benedikte Ferner. Sometimes royals are notable in their own right. In this case, Benedikte Ferner owns an upmarket fashion boutique, also named Benedikte Ferner. http://www.benedikteferner.no/ The Norwegian article at no:Benedikte Ferner has additional information about her that I can't read.

She got married and divorced and is now living with Aage Hvinden. She ran a restaurant for a couple of years. Doesn't add up to notability IMHO. Dlyons493 Talk

Keep verifiable grandchildren of monarchs (this seems reasonable, right?); merge Benjamin into Elisabeth's article. Ardric47 22:39, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment—Perhaps some people "voted" based on their position in the British line of succession. That information is overshadowed by their relations to the Norwegian royal family. Ardric47 22:41, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Liz; Delete Ben and Bene - Liz is close enough to the Norwegian throne. The others are not. BlueValour 04:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as royals. Nickieee 07:36, 20 August 2006 (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.