Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Tudor

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus, defaulted to keep. --Phroziac ^(talk) 14:15, September 8, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edward Tudor

There is only flimsy evidence that this individual ever existed. There is nothing to show he ever did anything, notable or otherwise, besides possibly being born to royalty, and even that seems unlikely. Sarge Baldy 04:33, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

• Our article on Henry VII of England doesn't mention him having a son of that name. Neither does Historic World Leaders published by Galenet in 1994. As it is not verifiable, the contents should be deleted and it should become a redirect to Edward VI of England. Capitalistroadster 05:17, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect With only a couple of sentances in the entry it would be better to redirect this to the Henry VII page untill such time more information can be located as to the veracity of the entry--Machtzu 05:26, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Henry VII of England and label as rumor until more verifiable info can be found to warrant separate entry. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:05, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
• Merge to Henry VII of England, then redirect to Edward VI of England (possibly adding an "otheruses" notice to the top of the latter). KissL 10:16, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• DeleteLack of evedence DV8 2XL 11:24, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Henry VII of England until confirmed proof of existence can be found and verified. Prsgoddess187 15:41, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Edward VI of England, an Edward Tudor who definitely did exist. This article is rumour, probably unfounded, even turning it into a redirect to Henry VII of England could be giving this rumour undue legitimacy, although it could be mentioned very briefly in the article on Henry. PatGallacher 17:41, 2005 August 31 (UTC)
• Keep - The fact there is a possibility he existed, and that there is discussion, is grounds that he is of significant historical interest, and should be kept. Rhyddfrydol, 22:27 31 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Any son, or possible son, of a King of England, deserves an article. Bhoeble 01:59, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Edward VI of England, who is by far the most famous person named Edward Tudor. john k 03:54, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Edward VI of England. Contents practically already are at Henry VII. 217.140.193.123 20:02, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Bhoeble. Do not merge. —RaD Man (talk) 06:57, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as per Bhoeble. --Nicodemus75 11:01, 3 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.