Wiki143:Articles for deletion/Albrecht Prinz von Croy

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, so kept. Dmcdevit·t 01:02, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

Albrecht Prinz von Croy

This was marked as a speedy, but does not meet any of the speedy criteria. His article seems to have been deleted from the German wikipedia, and the page now contains the text

Dieser Artikel ist gesperrt, weil eine anomyme IP, vermutlich auf Grund massiven Eigeninteresses, den Artikel immer wieder einstellt. --Philipendula 10:52, 19. Jul 2005 (CEST)

Or translated

This article is protected, because an anonymous IP, probably because of massive own interest, keeps recreating the article.

No vote from me. Thue | talk 15:35, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment: The article was proposed deleted on the German WP and a clear majority voted to keep it. It was however unilaterally deleted, and the sysop Philipendula, who seems to have strong personal interest in the article, seems determined to delete a valid article about a well-known journalist and editor of one of the larger German newspapers at any cost. The German Wikipedia clearly has a problem with abusive behaviour from some sysops who delete articles in contradiction with community decision. The only argument for deleting I saw on the German Wikipedia was that he happened to be noble, and obviously some POV pushers with sysop access doesn't like nobles. Here on English Wikipedia we do however not accept such totalitarian behaviour. There is no reason for deleting this article, but Philipendula should be desyopped at the German Wikipedia.

For those interested in Google stats: The two used spellings of his name returns 216 Google hits.

I found the German vfd debate, and found it strange too as it indicated a keep to me too, but was wondering if my bad German language skills were tricking me. Since nobody has given a good reason for deletion I have removed the vfd template. Thue | talk 21:45, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

my5cents on the "comment" above:
(1) clear majority: on de:WP at the time I deleted the article, we got 4 votes belonging to this, two of them to "keep", two of them to "delete" it if there would be no more biographical relevance to see after the 7 days of discussion [1] (meanwhile one of the voters to "keep" changed his opinion!). I decided to delete the article because I didn't see any elemantary progress to this direction.
(2) totalitarian behaviour: no comment on this.
(3) After the deletion of the article, the author made very strong efforts to get the decision reversed (writing to all involved voters and in an offensive mode to me as the sysop; reinstalling the article many times and under different titles); at last he called for undeletion on the equivalent to Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion, but he got no support [2].
(4) The sysop Philipendula is only one of the about 7 sysops supporting my decision - it is very unkind and incorrect to drop her name here, where no one will be able to understand the background.
(5) (and last) Belonging the relevance of this journalist (cause the author named the google stats): You may check th google results here, where I gave the links on three different spellings of the name. In short: The above mentioned 216 hits reduce to about 60 (reduced by google, hiding very similar results) - and all of them are pages either only naming Croy (most of them by the newspaper or affiliated pages) or blogs written by Croy himself, nothing about him.
IMHO (and following the deletion in de:WP) the journalist is not notable but this is no vote, because I'm only part-time-visitor here and not familiar with the delition policy on en:WP. Excuse me writing very simple english - cu --Rax 00:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC) vfd reopened in agreement with User:Thue --Rax 00:01, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Replies:

clear majority: on de:WP at the time I deleted the article, we got 4 votes belonging to this, two of them to "keep", two of them to "delete" it if there would be no more biographical relevance to see after the 7 days of discussion [3] (meanwhile one of the voters to "keep" changed his opinion!). I decided to delete the article because I didn't see any elemantary progress to this direction.

The article was significantly expanded after the votes. When the first two people voted to give it more time, it was only a sub-stub. If you hadn't deleted the article history in contradiction with the result of the VfD process, you could have discovered this by yourself.

The sysop Philipendula is only one of the about 7 sysops supporting my decision - it is very unkind and incorrect to drop her name here, where no one will be able to understand the background.

Benutzer:Philipendula seems to primarily be an aggressive revert warrior, and has herself engaged in nasty slander against me and even against the person the article deals with, which is really childish. I believe such a person should not be sysop.

cause the author named the google stats

It was the Germans who started citing Google stats, however manipulated/false stats where they claimed to only have 49 hits when the factual number was 216. This is the reason I mentioned this.

IMHO (and following the deletion in de:WP) the journalist is not notable

The Handelsblatt is a leading German newspaper and is clearly notable. The Wikipedia has articles about quite a lot less notable people than editors of newspapers like Handelsblatt, given that m:Wiki is not paper. The real reason for the illegal deletion on de: was something which looked like hatred against nobles. You have failed to cite a single relevant argument for deleting this page.

I suggest we close this VfD process (again) unless we soon see some actual arguments for why this page should be deleted.

• I agree; no arguments about the merits of the actual article has been given. When those arguments have been supplied, remember to relist this page in the VFD page so people can find it. Thue | talk 11:27, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

I added it on Votes for deletion/Log/2005 July 19 at the end - hope it's right? --Rax 12:34, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

• delete - in using the same arguments as been given earlier by User:Cyrius which had been reverted see this diff "editor of a not terribly big newspaper? Revert warring anonymous supporter? Smells wrong." (see history of this vfd page and (meanwhile deleted) history of the articles talk). IMHO the article has been created to promote a journalist to get him relevant; see 30 google hits (hiding very similar up to 120) with the "von" in the name + 12 google hits (hiding very similar up to 168) without the "von". All of them are pages either only naming Croy (most of them by the newspaper or affiliated pages) or blogs written by Croy himself, nothing about him. IMHO (and following the deletion in de:WP) the journalist is not notable currently - when he ever will be, it's early enough to give him an article here. --Rax 12:34, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

• vote should be discounted. Recently created account with less than 50 edits, main activity at the English Wikipedia seems to be the campaign to get this specific article deleted.
• "All of them are pages either only naming Croy (most of them by the newspaper or affiliated pages) or blogs written by Croy himself, nothing about him." This is obviously untrue, his appointment as managing editor was a news story published various places, e.g. here. .... at 05:12, July 22, 2005 83.109.140.181 wrote this but forgot to hit the ~ key four times

The page link above is from dpa - and is nothing but a copy of the announcement of "Verlagsgruppe Handelsblatt" - --Rax 10:26, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - editor of a not terribly big newspaper? No other apparent notability, and only the barest verifiability? Revert warring anonymous supporter who keeps recreating the deleted German article on the English article's talk page? Smells wrong. -- Cyrius|✎ 19:29, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • The Handelsblatt is clearly an important newspaper in Germany (can be compared to The Wall Street Journal). I don't know how much you know about newspapers, but in Europe is a serious (not tabloid) newspaper with a circulation of 148,319 daily copies a fairly big newspaper.
• Comment. The merits of the nomination are tainted by the mistranslation: The German page does not say that the article keeps being recreated, but disfigured ("entstellt"). That's a huge difference. The German VfD apparently did not result in a consensus. No vote until more information is provided. Martg76 22:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I just discovered that I misread the German sentence (entstellt instead of einstellt). The translation is correct, even though the sentence is not normally used idiomatic German. Martg76 22:54, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
• Delete and protect, judging by the responses above the German 'pedia had it right. Radiant_>|< 12:20, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
  • completely ridiculous argument which has nothing to do with the article. According to the German Wikipedians, arguments is what matters. So why are you not able to produce a single relevant argument? Is it so difficult? We are clearly not going to delete a valid article withouth a single argument cited for deleting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.143.115 (talk • contribs) 14:52, 21 July 2005

• I have an actual vote! (What a concept!) If this person really is the "managing editor" of Handelsblatt (which should be easy to verify from the Handelsblatt web site), keep. Handelsblatt is a major German newspaper (I'd heard of it long before), and being the managing editor of a major newspaper meets the notability threshold (but just). Compare, for instance, Bill Keller. Noel (talk) 16:20, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

  The New York Times has ten times the circulation of the paper in question, and Bill Keller is a Pulitzer Prize winner. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:38, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

  Are only people who have received American prizes included in Wikipedia? US centrism? Smells wrong. ...at 04:56, July 22, 2005 83.109.140.181 wrote this but forgot to hit the ~ key four times

  If you continue to twist my words, this will become quite ugly. I see no German, European, worldwide, or other awards, accolades, or honors listed for this man. The Pulitzer Prize is an example of something that would make a newspaper editor notable, and is one of the reasons Bill Keller has an article. All I see is that he's been working for a newspaper with an unimpressive circulation for a couple of years. Stop making claims of abuse and tell us why he is important. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

  The US is a lot bigger than Germany, so of course a major US paper will have a larger circulation than a German equivalent. (Actually, a better comparison might have been the managing editor of the WSJ, but I was too lazy to go look up who that was.) As for the award, I agree that Keller is more significant - which is why he has a much longer article. Anyway, I did say it was "just" over the keep borderline. Noel (talk) 17:11, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

• Ahem...
  • The entire reference to the German VfD is entirely pointless, as the VfD process on de.wikipedia and article relevance criteria are significantly different there.
  • The managing editor information can be verified, e.g. http://www.presseportal.de/story.htx?nr=444420&firmaid=8076
  • Whether that makes Croy significant enough for en.wikipedia I cannot say. I've seen quite a number of biographies here, which I'd consider entirely pointless, so it doesn't seem to be a big problem. Pjacobi 22:02, July 21, 2005 (UTC)
• Verifiably the managing director of a notable newspaper, and thus obviously worthy of inclusion. Keep. (True, his name is ridiculous, but I've seen few objections to, say, Pokemon on the basis of their silly names. What else is not to like?) -- Hoary 03:07, July 22, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment - the anon who created this article keeps recreating the deleted German article on its talk page. -- Cyrius|✎ 06:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: User:Cyrius is in violation of Wikipedia policy deleting the article's talk page where a previous version is stored for historical reference. ... at 10:45, July 22, 2005 83.109.140.181 wrote this but forgot to hit the ~ key four times
• Delete: Not notable enough and not enough material. Someone who gathers enough material can write a new page. (SEWilco 06:15, 22 July 2005 (UTC))
  • I'd be happy to supply more material, but it's really not easy when the article constantly is attempted deleted. I believe the current size is reasonable and common for a stub at Wikipedia. ... at 10:45, July 22, 2005 83.109.140.181 wrote this but forgot to hit the ~ key four times

Also, the English Wikipedia has articles about all people who hold a British noble title. A German Prince should automatically be significant enough to be included. .... at 10:57, July 22, 2005 83.109.140.181 wrote this but forgot to hit the ~ key four times

Actually, it seems that certain people have made articles here about just everyone who now hold a British peerage. However, such should not be a standard here.Arrigo 23:20, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Comment: (i) Mr/Ms 83.109.140.181, when you comment, please end by adding ~~~~. This is pretty easy. Thank you. (ii) I find it hard to believe that "the English Wikipedia has articles about all people who hold a British noble title". After all, the latter include a lot of utter nonentities. (iii) I'd agree that German (or Albanian, or Lithuanian, or Bugandan, or whatever) "nobility" is no less noteworthy than British "nobility"; but really, I couldn't give two hoots about Croy's "nobility", though I find his continuing use of this name ludicrous, mildly disturbing, or both. I say he's worth inclusion as managing editor of a notable newspaper: for all I care, he might call himself Ras Albrecht X and wear dreadlocks. -- Hoary 13:00, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

If I understand German law correctly, "Prinz von Croy" is, legally, his surname, and has been from birth. (Former noble titles automatically became surnames when everything went to pieces in 1918, essentially.) So that doesn't indicate any particularly outré pretensions on his part, AIUI. Choess 00:15, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for my partial ignorance there. But I had thought that people dropped the "Prinz", "Ritter", "Hochrattenfänger" or whatever immediately preceded "von", and that the more progressive types dropped the "von" as well. Anyway, to me his name is an irrelevance. -- Hoary 02:57, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Why should people drop the "von" or their titles? Britons do use their titles, Italians do use their titles, Swedes do use their titles, so why shouldn't Germans? The vast majority of noble Germans use their title if they have any, and those belonging to former royal (souvereign) families do also use styles like "His Highness" etc. I essentially agree that the reason we should have an article about him is his position at the Handelsblatt, which is why I wrote about him, but I also find it mildly disturbing that people say his nobility doesn't matter when it seems to matter for British barons who get an article without being noteworthy in any other way. 83.109.156.172 05:42, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

If I were born Josef von Bloggs, I'd be disturbed by the reminders of nitwit nobility as depicted by George Grosz and others, and drop the "von". Brits and others can and do drop their titles. Let's have some examples of articles about unremarkable British barons: perhaps these could be put up for VfD. -- Hoary 05:53, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

But "von" is not a title, but a name-part, just like "van" is in Holland, "di" is in Italy and "de" is in France (examples: Dominique de Villepin, Antonio Di Pietro, Max van der Stoel). Continental European names are different from English in that way. Predicates have historically nothing to do with nobility per se, and there are also un-noble families with "von" in their names, especially in Northern Germany. Would you really change your family name, as used for perhaps centuries, if you were born in Germany (especially when "von" (as generally, but not always, indicating nobility) and titles do have high social prestige), or in France, Holland or Italy? It's true that not all German nobles always use their titles. Richard von Weizsäcker, who is a Baron (Freiherr) and whose official name is "Richard Freiherr von Weizsäcker", did mostly not use his title in daily business, but that is something different from actually changing the family name. 83.109.162.34 09:01, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

If my name were X Prinz von Y, I'd introduce myself as X Y, yes. (But why do you ask?) If titles have high social prestige, I hope that this is not among the general public but merely among a minority of ninnies. -- Hoary 09:24, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Titles have high prestige in most of the society. Germany is no different from Britain in that way. I believe it's rather those who are not impressed by titles who constitute the minority. Germans are generelly focused on titles, if they hold a doctoral degree they always call themselves "Dr. [Name]", even in situations where the degree is completely irrelevant. 83.109.165.239 13:57, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

I have lived in Britain for quite some time, and can assure you that the huge majority of people I know are uninterested in aristocratic titles. (Granted, few of these acquaintances are readers of Hello or the Daily Mail.) I don't claim to have run any surveys. A doctorate is a different matter from a baronetcy or whatever they're called: you get to be a doctor by hard work (unless of course you use a degree mill). A doctorate may impress me to some extent; being a viscount does not. -- Hoary 14:16, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

And btw: the nobility was abolished in Germany after WW I, so there are no German nobility titles anymore. "von", "Freiherr" etc. are parts of the name, not titles. --Rosenzweig 12:08, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

• Keep. Sufficiently noteworthy person. Arrigo 23:20, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I doubt the article will ever be useful to many, but it does meet the criteria. As Hoary said: Verifiably the managing director of a notable newspaper. The German WP has stricter criteria for keeping articles throughout, no wonder they had it deleted. They don't have Pokemon character articles, either. Rl 15:07, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Managing editor of a mass circulation newspaper. I consider this to be very close to a frivolous nomination. Utterly inexplicable. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:27, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

mh - the only reference for this 'editor' has been given by Pjacobi above; following this he is responsable for "Budget, Organisation und Technik ... [and] alle redaktionellen Servicebereiche". He is not part of the Masthead or the editorial board - see the "Impressum" of the paper: [4]. --Rax 16:37, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

It is a confusing case, and a perfect time waster for many good editors. His job title certainly has a very executive ring to it. The imprint does indeed mention many people, none of which is this guy. On the other hand the press release did mention a position that makes him borderline notable (e.g. "Chef vom Dienst des Magazins der FAZ" – these guys don't hire just anybody to lead their magazine). Ah well, I don't care what happens to this article. I just hope it won't become a precedent for cases that I do care about. Rl 17:12, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

• Please, I know what a managing editor is. That he isn't responsible for daily editorial decisions is immaterial. He holds a very senior post at a mass circulation newspaper. I continue to find the proposal to delete this article completely beyond understanding. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 18:57, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Ok - no doubt about that you're knowing what a managing editor is. But is Croy really the "managing editor"? The announcement with the information (managing editor = "Geschäftsführender Redakteur") about this is from 08.05.2003 - and the actual imprint gives other names (managing editor = "Geschäftsführung"?) - for the same post? For the Verlagsgruppe Handelsblatt GmbH there are named Bernd Ziesemer (also named in the WP-article Handelsblatt) as editor-in-chief and the editor Julius Endert as responsible editor; for the Handelsblatt GmbH (the paper) there are named Ziesemer as editor-in-chief again and Andres Arntzen and Harald Müsse as "Geschäftsführung" - is to say, that the information given in the article obviously can hardly be verified - pfhh - but this will be my last piece on this entry - R1 is wright. Best wishes --Rax 22:13, 25 July 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.