Jump to content

Talk:Rothschild family

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kylenielsen (talk | contribs) at 07:33, 6 January 2024 (→RFC: re previous change in lede to "European" from "Ashkenazi Jewish": Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

Semi-protected edit request on 6 August 2021

Lede:

Their buildings adorn landscapes across northwestern Europe.

Whether a given building is to be considered to "adorn" a given landscape is ultimately in the eye of the beholder, surely. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a less subjective verb to replace this one with, though, so a rephrasing along the lines of

Many examples of the family's rural architecture exist across northwestern Europe.

might be the way to go instead?

- 2A02:560:42A9:6900:7C4B:59F3:C243:A073 (talk) 11:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 12:21, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Their role in slave trade

For some reason it is omitted in this entry

https://www.ft.com/content/92d13310-6284-11de-b1c9-00144feabdc0 https://www.reuters.com/article/britain-slavery-idUSL171535320090701OutoeSky (talk) 05:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The solution is simple: just write about it. The article is semi-protected, that is, this page cannot be edited by unregistered users (IP addresses), as well as accounts that are not confirmed or automatically confirmed (accounts that are at least four days old and have made at least ten edits to Wikipedia) . Semi-protection is useful when there is a significant amount of disruption or vandalism from new or unregistered users. By registering, you can edit. PrazerCambraia (talk) 14:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

I have added the correct German pronunciation at the beginning of the article, since the supposed English pronunciation is completely wrong but widely used. Mispronouncing a given name time and again does not make it correct. I think that even the pronunciation [ˈʁoːθ.ʃɪlt] would be acceptable. --Schmutzman (talk) 09:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What nonsense! The family has been in England for 200 years & can pronounce their name however they like. I've put the German into a note. Johnbod (talk) 14:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Mispronouncing a given name for a long time doesn't make it correct. English pronunciation of proper names is a problem in itself. You wouldn't pronounce "Hitler" as /ˈhaɪtlə/ which is more consistant with the usual English pronunciation. The morpheme "child" is a misunderstanding - the word is "Schild", which is German for "shield". So Just because someone "thinks" he knows how to pronounce a word doesn't mean it's correct. German has very clear and strict rules for pronouncing words. You can rely on my expertise: German is my mother tongue and I have a MA in English. Schmutzman (talk) 14:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
English pronunciations are not governed by German rules, thank heavens. This is the English Wikipedia, and you would do well to learn Anglophone ways. No wonder the family left Austria & Germany over 150 years ago!Johnbod (talk) 15:18, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations! You've managed to drag a discussion about correctly pronouncing a proper name into the gutter. /irony on/ Rothschilds left Germany and Austria because they were fed up with being pronounced correctly /irony off/ The anglophone way of pronunciation is erratic and often fails to come even close to the original e.g. Zeus is actually pronounced like /ze'us/ not /zjuːs/. Schmutzman (talk) 16:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since this is English Wikipedia, the pronunciation conventionally used in English should be primary, even though it's etymologically "wrong". But IMO the German pronunciation should not be relegated to a footnote either, so I've put it in the lead section after the Anglicised one. Hairy Dude (talk) 17:27, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Was just about to note this, but saw you already mentioned it! Thanks! Nikolaih☎️📖 02:48, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

in the category bit at the bottom of any Rothschild family, Nicole Stephane should be mentioned for the France bit

she was an actress in La Silence de la Mer and Les Enfants Terribles 92.40.6.61 (talk) 12:19, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RFC: re previous change in lede to "European" from "Ashkenazi Jewish"

@Yedaman54 @Tol @Saturnalia04

We're always extremely specific about ancestry, if mentioned at all as being notable, and exclude the ethnicity otherwise, per WP:ETHNICITY. We should either be specific or not say it at all. DarmaniLink (talk) 02:47, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Noting also user talk discussion (permalink)) I believe the Rothschild family is primarily known for their banking activities, not their ethnicity; their ethnicity should be mentioned, but I don't think the lead sentence is appropriate placement. I would support opening with something along the lines of "The Rothschild family is a wealthy banking family originally from Frankfurt..." and moving the mention of their ethnicity to somewhere else in the lead. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 02:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, lets do that. I'll leave you to change it how you deem appropriate and tell you if I agree, or touch it up if I don't. DarmaniLink (talk) 02:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • They are well known in antisemitic conspiracy theories https://www.britannica.com/story/where-do-anti-semitic-conspiracy-theories-about-the-rothschild-family-come-from and reliable sources do give them ample coverage for this. New editors trying to change it, are you being paid by anyone, or part of any organizing trying to remove things from Wikipedia that make Israel or Jews look bad? I just saw a video of a group doing that. Dream Focus 03:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Should we keep their ethnicity in the lede sentence, or move it elsewhere to the lede?
    I'm fine with leaving it as is, for the record, I was against its removal in the first place, and just opened this as a forum to curb potential edit warring. DarmaniLink (talk) 03:51, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It should be there since that is what they are well known for. Wikipedia does not censor the truth. Dream Focus 03:52, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Not trying to censor the truth :)
    I'm trying to stop edit warring over this sentence before it becomes a big problem.
    If their ethnicity is part of their notability, then we should leave it there. DarmaniLink (talk) 03:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Rothschild’s are Jewish. Very simple. No debate here Saturnalia04 (talk) 04:41, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think anybody is disputing that; the discussion is on how important and relevant their ethnicity is, and how prominently placed in the article it should thus be. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 04:49, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I do agree that their ethnicity is widely covered in RS, and that it should be included; I just don't think that it's important enough to put in the lead sentence. What would you think about the change I proposed above? (Also, I don't see how changing "Ashkenazi Jewish" to "European" would be pro-Jewish or pro-Israel; am I missing something?) Tol (talk | contribs) @ 04:28, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    From MOS:ETHNICITY
    The first sentence should usually state:
    1. Name(s) and title(s), if any (see also WP:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility)). Handling of the subject's name is covered below in § First mention.
    2. Dates of birth and death, if found in secondary sources (do not use primary sources for birth dates of living persons or other private details about them).
    3. Context (location, nationality, etc.) for the activities that made the person notable.
    4. One, or possibly more, noteworthy positions, activities, or roles that the person is mainly known for, avoiding subjective or contentious terms.
    5. The main reason the person is notable (key accomplishment, record, etc.)
    However, try to not overload the first sentence by describing everything notable about the subject; instead, spread relevant information over the lead paragraph.
    So the main question seems to be
    Is it a distinct type of family, warranting specification, and distinct from other families or nobility, where valuable information would be lost if it were not specified?
    Well, [[List of European Jewish nobility|Noble]] is in the type field in the infobox. However, I don't know if Ashkenazi Jewish nobility is duly different enough from other nobility to demand distinction. Would we do the same for other nobility that isn't Ashkenazi Jewish? I think it depend on how notable their ethnicity or nationality is to the family's identity.
    Are they strongly associated with Judaism, or the Ashkenazi Jewish community?
    Well, based on RS coverage, and their own description of themselves, that does seem to be the case. Going strictly off wikipedia's manual of style, it should likely be in the lede sentence. However, per WP:IAR it could be moved to elsewhere in the lead if it stylistically seems worse in the first sentence. DarmaniLink (talk) 05:10, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No I am not paid by the Israeli government lmao. I was using the same logic as what Tol stated. Also kinda a low blow to assume that we are paid by Israel. Thats a bold accusation to be even questioning people about. Yedaman54 (talk) 04:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it as it is - The Rothschild family is notable for being a wealthy Jewish family so this description provides the reader with useful information straight away. 2405:DA40:435D:4500:68EB:62AA:E941:276E (talk) 05:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's saying we should play into anti-semitic stereotypes. OJ Simpson is still known for murder but the introduction paragraph for him at least establishes that he got famous as a football player before discussing the trial. Kylenielsen (talk) 07:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kylenielsen Excuse me, but what exactly is malicious about describing them as they have been previously described?
Don't change information actively under discussion, especially dont edit war it back in WP:BRD. And don't accuse people of malicious intent WP:AGF. DarmaniLink (talk) 05:53, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't change information, I simply removed a part in the introduction that was further expanded upon later in the article. I noticed that it was causing a fuss on [1]social media in addition to the pointlessness and just took initiative Kylenielsen (talk) 07:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should the shortdesc and the type be reverted back to Jewish Noble Banking Family, or should the change to Noble Banking family be kept? DarmaniLink (talk) 06:46, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rothschild_family&oldid=1193915518"