Talk:Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Politics and government work group.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

Contents

[edit] Recent edit

I'm really inclined to revert this recent edit to Paul Lambrino. Referring to Mircea Grigore Carol Lambrino as "illegitimate" strikes me as rather bogus (yes, Carol II's marriage to Zizi Lambrino was annulled, but that was basically just politics). Calling him "Mircea Grigore" instead of "Carol Lambrino" just seems snide. "King Michael is a recognized protector of the Jews during WWII" seems dubious ("recognized by whom")? And removing {{House of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen}} and {{Euro-royal-stub}} seems just polemical. - Jmabel | Talk 23:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was no consensus to move the page, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 13:03, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern → Paul Lambrino — This article was moved and and the old location protected by Phil Sandifer without consensus after threats of moving the page if reasoning wasn't up to snuff for him. Paul Lambrino is the most common name for this subject and few if any people call him "Paul Hohenzollern". Ideally and rightly, the old page name should be restored and the onus would be on Phil Sandifer to make an argument for a controversial move which has now become disruptive. One user personally should not have to be persuaded in what an article's title is. The old name ought to be restored and Phil Sandifer should then make a case for moving it. —Charles 14:51, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

While I agree that few people call him Phil Sandifer, I'm not sure that's germaine... Phil Sandifer 15:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.
  • Support As nominator and per my reasoning as to the move process and also for the majority usage of "Paul Lambrino". Charles 14:52, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Paul Lambrino is not the subject's legal name, and he has actively complained about locating the article there. Given that it is not his name and that he does not wish to be called it, it is a major problem to locate the article there. I am not married to this location, but Paul Lambrino is a policy-violating place for this article. See also OTRS #2007101710008671. Phil Sandifer 14:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I am unable to locate it. Please provide a link. Charles 15:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I suspect you lack OTRS access, rendering the issue moot. OTRS is the e-mail system by which people contact Wikipedia with questions and concerns - it's locked except to authorized users because it has a ton of sensitive BLP issues in it. Phil Sandifer 15:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I will be requesting access to review it. Charles 15:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • I am unable to locate a page which appears to definitively have a process for signing up/volunteering for the system (sometihng I am interested in anyway) other than one with what appear to be requests dating back to July. I can understand the subject being sensitive to material in the article, but the title is in no way libellous or even malicious and reflects most common usage. Any guidance in volunteering for the system would be appreciated as all links I have opened thus far have literally led me in a circle. Charles 15:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Phil Sandifer and OTRS. ^demon[omg plz] 15:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern is probably the most neutral name for this article as it is his legal name and doesn't promote his claims by naming it Prince Paul of Romania which he uses, or Paul Lambrino which opponents of his claim seem to use. - dwc lr 16:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose per dwc lr. It would be helpful to know how unbiased secondary sources refer to this person, both before and since the court ruling on his legal name. Absent that, subject's own preference (considering WP:BLP) and the court ruling seem a strong case. --BlueMoonlet 16:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose He was granted the name Hohenzollern without the "von" by the European courts. He may use the surname but not the title of Prince. As much as I disagree with the usage of the surname the courts prevail. Tim Foxworth 04:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose per dwc and Tim Foxworth. Calling him "Prince Paul-Philippe, heir apparent to the Crown of Romania" would be indulgent, and "Paul Lambrino" smacks a bit of Louis Capet--victor falk 10:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Any additional comments:

The Daily Telegraph obit of his father ( February 9, 2006; p.23) calls its subject Prince Carol of Romania (I have this from Lexis, so have no link.) It also offers a clearer account of Prince Carol's birth, and says that he was declared legitimate by a Rumanian court in 2003, but the decision was appealled. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 23:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

[edit] This has become an uncited mess

There have been major additions to this article with almost no addition of citations. We need to sort this mess out. - Jmabel | Talk 16:25, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

I've put a lot of "fact" & "weasel" tags in the article. All of these things need citation & attribution, respectively. Also, because a Washington Times article cited for several points is apparently not available online, it might be useful if someone with "no horse in this race" might seek a copy and make sure it says what it is cited as saying. And/or we might seek a second source to back this up: the Washington Times is hardly one of America's most respected newspapers. - Jmabel | Talk 16:44, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Some facts could be cited from his website. The Washington Times Article can be found on the talk page of his fathers article. - dwc lr (talk) 17:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)