Template talk:House of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Romania (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Romania, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Romania-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.

Lambrino family[edit]

King Michaels grandchildren don’t claim royal titles, styles or to be members of the Royal Family. Paul Lambrino has used the title “Prince of Hohenzollern of Romania“ and wrote a book about his grandfather Carol II using the title. According to marriage records I’ve seen online his fathers surname is “de Hohenzollern”.[1] Please leave these people in the template. - dwc lr 21:43, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't make him a member of the House of Hohenzollern. Same thing with morganatic Saxe-Coburgs, Prussians, etc, etc. And for that reason, I am reverting it. Charles 02:58, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
If morganatic Saxe-Coburgs or Prussians claim titles and memebership they should be listed in templates such as this. Paul Lambrino has used Hohenzollern in his title it’s only npov to list the Lambrino’s here. - dwc lr 11:38, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
What you think should be done is wrong because you cannot think people into being members of a royal house they don't belong to. Charles 16:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
What mine or your personal opinions are irrelevant, presenting a npov is all that maters and you genuinely believe removing them from this template does that? - dwc lr 16:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
You are not presenting a NPOV though. Where is the source making the Lambrinos princes of Hohenzollern and members of that house? Charles 16:29, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Does Paul Lambrino use the title Prince of Hohenzollern used by memebers of the house, yes.[2] Does PL regard himself a member of the RF, yes. Is this template presenting a NPOV, no. - dwc lr 16:52, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Did Hilda Toledano use the title Duchess of Braganza? Yes. Did she regard herself as a member of the Royal Family? Yes. Would it be NPOV to list her as a member of the House of Wettin-Braganza? No. The same can be said for people with stronger claims who were legitimate, but not dynasts. Paul Lambrino can use all of the titles he wants and claim to be a member of whatever family he wants but that does not make him a member of the House of Hohenzollern or a Prince of Hohenzollern. See also: Talk:Romanian Royal Family. Charles 16:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for the link, by the way: But this ruling failed to establish the pretender as Prince Paul Philip of Hohenzollern of Romania, as he prefers to be known. Charles 16:57, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I've never argued that his claims are sound just that npov should be presented. - dwc lr 17:04, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
It is not neutral point of view though to style everyone who claims to be as "HRH Prince" and it is not NPOV, nor your place, to make the Lambrino line members of the House of Hohenzollern, a claim which has no reliable source. Charles 17:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
They were not even listed like everyone else in the template they were listed under the article titles mentioning that they styled themselves prince. It may not be npov to style anyone who claims to a prince as such but it is npov to present the different views fairly and I believe the template was doing that. - dwc lr 18:13, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
You listed them that way at other articles and that is surely POV. The difference between styling members of former royal families as princes and then people who claim to be members of those families is that there has been a consistent international precedent for doing so when these families are present at extant courts. That's why we have King Michael and Queen Anne of Romania, King Constantine and Queen Anne Marie of Greece and so on. It is NPOV to do that as it records government usage, etc (see government webpages for state funerals of royals, etc, and the guest lists). It doesn't, however, extend to people like the Lambrino Hohenzollerns. Charles 20:09, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I see no problem with the way they were listed Legal Name (styles self prince) that listing shows that their status is under dispute all we can do is present the information without bias removing them shows bias. - dwc lr (talk) 21:41, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
Giving them a position they legally did not hold nor would have held is not NPOV. It's easier to argue for undisputed members of such families since they generally clearly derive titles from their parents under the rules of a former system of government. That system did not extend the princely status to the Lambrinos and it is not our place to do so and putting them as members of a Royal House does just that. Charles 21:59, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
I think User:Charles is furthering a POV in this. This above "discussion" (yea-nay-yea-nay... no compromise foreseeable) has made me think that it could in certain cases be a source of POV to have this sort of template. It is not Wikipedia's job to determine who were/are and who were not/are not members of some House. Our task is to explain what are each such one's claims to that membership. The explanation task is not possible to do in a template, if it is to be not so cluttered. Compare with categories: with putting a category to some biography, we customarily do not decide whether the person belonged legitimately to the thing that category refers to, we mean that the person had something to do with the thing, and go look for explanation in pertinent articles. Template should do a similar thing and not be a "court of law" to decide upon someone's legitimate entitlements. Henq (talk) 06:20, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
If you're referring to Paul Hohenzollern, he did not become a member of the House of Hohenzollern by court ruling and he is not a member of the House of Romania as defined in the fundamental house rules (where the notion of a formal House of Romania came to be). Charles 06:39, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

"Romanian royalty" category[edit]

I removed it from the header of the template as it is inexact: half of the House of H.-S. was also German royalty, not just Romanian. Both King Carol I and King Ferdinand I (one half of the Romanian kings) were also German royalty, born and raised German. Furthermore, the successor of King Michael to the dynastic rights to the Romanian throne is also German royalty, Prince Frederick William. So to speak of just "Romanian royalty" is not just inexact, it is misleading. Lil' mouse (talk) 08:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

I have serious doubts that Carol I and Ferdinand were German royalty. Yes, they were German. Yes, they were of princely family there. But, Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen was not a kingdom, and royalty, as opposed to princely, needs to be closely enough in proper connection with a kingdom. Henq (talk) 06:13, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Please see WT:ROYALTY, there is a section there discussing the names of templates, etc. Basically, this template lists only Romanian royalty that is of the House of Hohenzollern, not the House of Hohenzollern which is Romanian royalty. This template only concerns Romanian royalty and identifies the house they belong to, it does not extend beyond that to other members of this house. For instance, see Template:House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Bulgaria), Template:House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (UK), Template:House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Portugal) and Template:House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Belgium). All houses of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, but Bulgarian, British, Portuguese and Belgian royalty, respectively. If a template is ever made for the whole house of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, this template will be renamed either House of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen (Romania) or House of Hohenzollern (Romania), according to the conventions which are in the works for standardizing template names. Charles 06:21, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


This is for the historic house which may contain current members. "Current" houses take the form of "...ian/ish/etc Royal Family". Given that, do not move it. Houses can have overlapping members. Charles 06:25, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

RfC notification[edit]

A request for comments which may impact this template has been started at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Biographies#RfC on style in royal family templates. You are welcome to comment there. Fram (talk) 14:28, 31 July 2013 (UTC)