Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Grandmother of Europe

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. Lord Roem ~ (talk) 16:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grandmother of Europe[edit]

Grandmother of Europe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I am unconvinced that this is a term with any currency, a feeling exacerbated by the lack of references.TheLongTone (talk) 15:42, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 15:47, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - there is also Father-in-law of Europe which is notable. Interstellarity (talk) 20:18, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Queen Victoria Queen Victoria#Descendants and haemophilia. There are a smattering of hits for others, but none from reliable sources. Only Victoria has those. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:31, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Yes, it does seem that reliable sources using this phrase are almost always referring to Victoria. These books are self-published. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:57, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I normally go for redirects , but in this case I think it would merely be baffling. Is there anything in the article on Victoria mentioning the phrase?TheLongTone (talk) 15:44, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's noted at Queen Victoria#Descendants and haemophilia, so the redirect should be to that particular section. Clarityfiend (talk) 20:41, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - this is a well-attested term used throughout history, most recently for Queen Victoria, albeit not in current use for any living person. This is useful for our core readers' navigation and as a list of women who held this informal title. Bearian (talk) 19:47, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Can you point to any reliable sources that use this description for anyone other than Victoria? Phil Bridger (talk) 20:14, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the term is notable We keep this as a service to our readers. Lightburst (talk) 22:06, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  I would ask you the same question that I asked above of Bearian. I'm quite prepared to believe that this term has been applied to other people in other reliable sources than those applying to Victoria, if evidence is provided, but I can't find any such sources myself. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:13, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  Not sure how reliable they are, but here is one using the term for Louise of Hesse-Kassel, and here is another using it for Carolina of Orange-Nassau. Victoria does seem to be the overwhelming favorite for the term, though. PohranicniStraze (talk) 17:45, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The first (history.info) is of dubious reliability, and the second uses the term as a description, not as a full-fledged nickname, and is of suspect reliability too. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:16, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. ミラP 18:05, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. ミラP 18:05, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep passes GNG easily. — Harshil ^{want to talk?} 04:21, 10 December 2019 (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.