Disputatio:Marcellus Albertus Cristofani

Reliable sources?

This article has been proposed for deletion on the Italian wikipedia: it:Wikipedia:Pagine da cancellare/Marcello Alberto Cristofani della Magione. Apparently, the title "della Magione" dates back to only 1979 ([1]), and I am not aware of the fact that new nobility is being created in Italy since 1948, so we have a contradiction there.

I fear that it will not be possible to provide reliable sources even for the correct name of this gentleman, therefore I am proposing the deletion of this article. --UV 21:29, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

you are right

UV with the democratic constitution of 1946/1948 the Italian Repubblic doesn't recognize any noble title.--Massimo Macconi 21:55, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does he claim that the title has been recognized by the Italian Republic? The German Wikipedia has de:Kurt Ostbahn which called himself "Dr. Kurt Ostbahn" and did not get this title from a university. ;-) --Rolandus 22:21, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A fellow may be unwise enough to call himself a count (or indeed a Dr.!) and still be notable for other reasons. The Order this man founded really seems to exist and to be of some note: see Militia Templi and the linked English article, which appears reasonably documented. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:29, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, well, I don't know now. If you Google "Militia Templi", you find that there is competition for the name. "Militia Templi Records" (now replaced by "My Funeral Records") looks the most interesting of the bunch to me. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:36, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am not quite sure, what problem we have:

That an existing person calls himself "della Magione"?
That he might not exist?
That he might not be relevant?
That other Wikipedias want to delete the article there?

I have asked Usor:Nuada, whether he can provide more information. Maybe he has just written an article using the information on that web site? We should not assume that someone wants to push something. BTW, Dr. Kurt Ostbahn was played by the artist de:Willi Resetarits. So even if "della Magione" is just a fiction, this might not be a problem. However, we need some clearification in this case, that's true. --Rolandus 22:40, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It'll be interesting to see what Nuada says. At present I am for keeping the article. There's a lady here who's about to become a novice in the Order: maybe we should ask her to report. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:47, 2 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This person appears to have founded the Militia Templi, and I do not contest that he might be notable for inclusion in an encyclopedia. The issue I am concerned about is verifiability and reliability of facts. There are huge disputes and edit wars over questions of fact concerning Militia Templi in various wikipedias (de:Diskussion:Militia Templi, for example, gives a brief impression). These doubts, as I pointed out above, extend even to the lemma of this article (is the article rightfully called Marcellus Albertus Cristofani della Magione or should the lemma just be Marcellus Albertus Cristofani, if that is his correct name?)

Let us wait to see what Usor:Nuada says, but if doubts as to the accuracy of the facts remain, I would propose to exclude all disputed facts from the article (and to delete the entire article, if the remaining undisputed facts do not amount at least to a valid stub). We do not have enough manpower to check on the accuracy of the facts ourselves, so if other wikipedias delete an article for lack of verifiability, we should in my view follow. --UV 21:43, 3 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If this happened to us on Vicipaedia frequently and was a big nuisance, I would more readily agree. Actually it happens to us rarely, and in two of the three recent cases that I'm aware of (Mehmet Murat Ildan, Stephanus Viu) I had the strong impression of a witch-hunt on other wikipedias. In the third case, also (Vincentius Bune) the other wikipedias' decision to delete was certainly wrong, though the story was different. In all three cases, I felt pleased that we did not join in and that we still have the articles. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 22:12, 3 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both I agree and highly appreciate that we watch other Wikipedias and note our doubts about articles like we do here. Generally readers should not trust an article without sources and they should check whether they shall trust the given sources. --Rolandus 22:22, 3 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usor:Nuada did some other edits today but did not react to the messages posted on his/her talk page. I removed the delenda but edited the article to reflect that some of the facts (name, nobility) are under dispute. --UV 23:02, 7 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, you found a good solution and I also noticed that Nuada does not seem to be much interested in arguing. So I am less interested in keeping this article, too, I confess. --Rolandus 23:16, 7 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I, too, think this is a good solution. I have cut most of the bibliography, which was a straight copy from the CESNUR site referenced on the page (copyvio therefore); the few items that seemed to contribute something biographical I have retained, rechecked, and referenced. (forgot to sign) Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 13:28, 8 Martii 2008 (UTC)[reply]

de novo

Same as above: Do we have reliable sources that Mr. Cristofani is indeed a "comes italicus"? --UV (disputatio) 20:03, 13 Martii 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Denuo autem formulam "Verba verificanda" habemus! Eam formulam imposui. Andrew Dalby (disputatio) 20:17, 13 Martii 2016 (UTC)[reply]