Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baron Campbell von Laurentz

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Serious concerns about the veracity and verifiability of this (entirely unsourced) content remain. To the extent there is a real and notable historical person to be covered here, the article may be recreated, with sources, and preferably by an experienced editor. Sandstein 18:41, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Baron Campbell von Laurentz[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I cannot be 100% certain, but I suspect that this article is a hoax. Pretty much everything looks wrong here, without counting the total lack of sources.

There was no Colonial Treasurer known as Pieter Laurentz Campbell and Alexander Macleay never was Governor of New South Wales.
Even if he did have some German ancestry, I find it highly unlikely that an Australian subject would go and fight for the Prussians.
If he was “the” hero of the Battle of Gravelotte he would have been able to secure a mention in that article or, at least, an article in the German Wikipedia.
How could the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha offer a Scottish title is beyond my imagination.
I have never heard of Prince Arthur being referred to as “Lord Strathearn” and I cannot see from what position he could object to such a petition.
The only place I found containing the image (apart from Wikipedia mirrors) was a forum post in which someone expresses their frustration about this very article.
These are the contributions of the creator

The Traditionalist (talk) 09:30, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Not a hoax by the look of these news articles [1] but his title was controversial (there are claims in one article that he was a Campbell, but not of the Campbells of Craignish, and while the title is a Scots name, it was considered 'foreign' because of who awarded it). The article needs a rewrite to get the facts sorted out (he did have a military career but no mention of Gravelotte). After that there may be a notability question. AnonNep (talk) 13:09, 27 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Not a hoax, but it manages to muddle together two brothers, Ronald Macleay Laurentz Campbell, Freiherr von Craignish and Edmund Kempt Campbell, Freiherr Campbell von Laurentz, both of whom were apparently equerries to Ernest II, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and awarded their titles by him. The two brothers both gained official permission to use their titles in Great Britain (with "Freiherr" translated as "Baron"). The person born in 1836 was Ronald (Edmund was born in 1848). The motoring writer seems to have been Edmund's daughter-in-law. For references, see this, this and this. A "Lieutenant Campbell of Craignisch" did fight on the Prussian side at Gravelotte (see this and this) - he was quite likely one or other of the brothers (several years before either got their titles, but either could have been using it to specify the branch of the Campbells to which they belonged) but I have not found anything even purporting to verify this. I doubt whether any of this even really starts justifying the notability of either brother, but it is possible that further searching will find something more substantial. PWilkinson (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:04, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:11, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.