Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ratzinger family

:{{la|Ratzinger family}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ratzinger_family Stats])

:({{Find sources|Ratzinger family}})

Three relatively closely related people does not a notable family make, and that's all we have here. The arms shown are clerical, not familial. As with the article on the pope emeritus's father (see deletion discussion), this is worth a sentence or so in each of the three articles in question, but no more. Mangoe (talk) 18:05, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

• Delete - each of the notable Ratzingers have their own Wikipedia article and there are wikilinks between each of them. There's no need for an (unsourced) article joining the dots. Sionk (talk) 23:57, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
• Delete, I agree that three notable people do not a family article make. I personally think this was done in the post election joy but ultimately fails notability, lines in the popes articles or wikilinks servers the pedia much better. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• Keep. It's a papal family with several members who are notable in their own right, even before the papal election it had at least three notable members in the 19th, 20th and 21st century. That makes a notable family. Whether the COA is clerical or not is irrelevant. Mocctur (talk) 15:05, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

::The article doesn't say that. If you want it to live, you need to find good sources that make it say that. Mangoe (talk) 15:16, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

:::Yes, it says so. Mocctur (talk) 20:37, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

::::There's no documentation that anyone thinks it's a notable family. It's just a list of three people with the (dubious) conclusion that this is enough to make the whole family notable. Mangoe (talk) 01:06, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:27, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

: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.