Talk:Alexander, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography: Royalty and Nobility This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility. Germany Start‑class Low‑importance Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Germany is a republic. No German titles are recognized. DrKay (talk) 17:09, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It has been proposed in this section that Alexander, Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe be renamed and moved to Alexander zu Schaumburg-Lippe. A bot will list this discussion on requested moves' current discussions subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the closing instructions). Please base arguments on article title policy, and keep discussion succinct and civil. Please use {{subst:requested move}}. Do not use {{requested move/dated}} directly. Links: current log • target log • direct move

Do not use hypothetical, dissolved or defunct titles, including pretenders (real or hypothetical), unless this is what the majority of reliable sources use.

German monarchy was abolished in 1919. The "zu" is in the name instead of "of" as names should not be translated.

Move request on similar pages for reference. D1551D3N7 (talk) 11:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. BD2412 T 17:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• support per nom—blindlynx 15:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose - the proposed title is unfamiliar looking in its German language form. GoodDay (talk) 10:14, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Oppose: EDIT: Per
  Wikipedia:NCROY, it is generally advisable to use the most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English ("common name" in the case of royalty and nobility may also include a person's title). The article subject is referred to as "Prince Alexander of Schaumburg-Lippe" by The Times, Tatler, South China Morning Post, News.com.au, ¡HOLA! The Daily Beast, Daily Mirror, The News International, and Geo TV. EDIT: CBS News uses "Prince Alexander zu Schaumburg-Lippe" --StellarHalo (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  "On Wikipedia, original research means material—such as facts, allegations, and ideas—for which no reliable, published source exists."

  It is a fact that Germany is a republic, not a monarchy. Hopefully Encyclopedia Britannica you consider a satisfactory source for that.

  This source used on the Wikipedia page for the Weimar Constitution has a translation of the Weimar Constitution which clearly states "Art. 109. All Germans are equal before the law. . . Titles of nobility . . may no longer be conferred."

  This is relevant in establishing that this title is a dissolved or defunct title.

  In light of the failed 2022 Reichsburger coup Wikipedia should not be espousing this minority viewpoint that these titles are real. There's extensive discussion on the German page regarding their article title choice of Alexander zu Schaumburg-Lippe. D1551D3N7 (talk) 13:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Read the rest of the

  WP:SYNTH, do not combine material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by any source. Similarly, do not combine different parts of one source to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source. None of the sources you brought up talks about the article subject. In other words, none of what you just said is relevant to this article's title or content. Wikipedia determines which viewpoint is majority or minority based on prominence in reliable sources, not what any one user concludes to be "real" or "truth" based on original research. It publishes what most reliable sources say about a topic and this is reflected in policies regarding Wikipedia:Article titles which says "Article titles are based on how reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject." Also, what happened over at the German Wikipedia is not relevant. If you are not willing to put forward arguments based on Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, then do not reply. StellarHalo (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Support per nomination. He is not the Prince of Schaumburg-Lippe and never was. There would need to be a
  WP:COMMONNAME argument to use the title anyway on grounds similar to Queen Latifah (i.e. sure, it's not a real title, but he's called that anyway) which isn't likely to happen for an obscure figure like this - one random tatler celeb gossip site reference does not a COMMONNAME make. To go back into the broader reasoning, noble titles are genuine government offices in some countries. If Wikipedia identifies someone by a noble title, there's a default assumption that the title is real and recognized, and not aspirational (we are not moving Bonapartist claimants to Emperor Napoleon VII of France, which is not a real title in the French government). It is very clearly not in this case - there is no such German government position. SnowFire (talk) 16:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

First,

original research including synthesis. Whatever assumption anyone gets from content on Wikipedia is not relevant. Its content has no obligation whatsoever to respect any government or law. Also, the title "Prince Napoléon" in Jean-Christophe, Prince Napoléon is purely a courtesy title and has never been created by a letter patent of any past French monarch or government. --StellarHalo (talk) 04:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

And I'd possibly be willing to move Napoleon VII's article as well, but OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. It's a less bad case at the very least as "Prince Napoleon" isn't anchored to a place.

I am a huge fan of VNT, so you're preaching to the choir there. However, hopefully you agree that it is easily verifiable that not only does the Principality of Schaumburg-Lippe no longer exist, but that the German nobility is abolished? And in general, I personally assign extremely, extremely little weight to "noble gossip" columns from lifestyle magazines. So their value as a source is outweighed here. If there were an avalanche of reliable sources of the highest order continuing to refer to them by this title on COMMONNAME basis, fine, but that doesn't exist. SnowFire (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:No original research is one of the three main content policies. Using the state of the German nobility to make a conclusion about someone's name that is not explicitly stated by any source is very much original research. Second, there has been no consensus that lifestyle magazines are unreliable. Your personal opinion on what weight to give them have no relevance in policies. All English-language RS that mention the article subject call him a prince. Most RS in other languages including German also do so. Also, no one else here besides me has been able to provide any source indicating what his full legal name actually is. StellarHalo (talk) 08:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]