Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skajnowski

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:37, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Skajnowski

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

Hoax. There are a number of gaping holes in this article.

The first hint is the coat of arms, which is the same image found on the Gorchakov page. (Since declining my prod, the page has been edited to say that Skajnowski and Gorchakov use the same coat of arms, previously it only said they were "similar").

The entry says that the family is descended from Great Prince Vladimir Svyatoslavich, but that entry does not mention "Skajnowski" or "Skajnovsky".

There are only 3 Google hits for "Skajnovsky", one is the page up for deletion. The main spelling, "Skajnowski" has more, but nothing particularly relevant looking, although there are two books in Polish which I can't read.

The references given are problematic. One is 404. Another is the Tolstoy novel War and Peace. But this book is fully searchable in Google Books, the names "Skajnowski", "Skajnovsky" and suggested alternate spellings appear nowhere in War and Peace. The remaining references are not available online. That doesn't disqualify them from being good references, but it makes the entry difficult to verify.

Prod declined without comment. Hairhorn (talk) 21:00, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason why I wrote "similar" at first was because the Gorchakov and Skajnowski families used a very similar coat of arms, as they have the same ancester (Vladimir I of Kiev). The senior branch of the Skajnowskis used a coat of arms which was nearly the same as the one used by the Gorchakovs, they instead also had added a extra sceptre to the black eagle, while the junior branch (more polonized) used a similar one.

The reason why I wrote it descended from Yaroslav the Wise is because he was the son of Vladimir I of Kiev. What regards the Tolstoy novel "War and Peace" it deals with the Rurikid dynasty as a whole and that was the reason behind it being used as a reference, but I realised later on, that it had not a big importance in the article. And sorry for me English I am a Russian, so it is hard for me to write perfect English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris Vladimirovich Petrov (talk • contribs) 22:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC) ( Boris Vladimirovich Petrov (talk) 09:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC) )[reply]

Delete There are a couple references listed now, but the second only covers through 1194, when the supposed founder of this family would have been 4 years old. Edward321 (talk) 23:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remember that you become a founder of a family as soon as you get born. And it also says estimated because of the uncertainty in general, what regards the descendents of the Rurikid dynasty and the families that claim Rurikid descendence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris Vladimirovich Petrov (talk • contribs) 09:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC) ( Boris Vladimirovich Petrov (talk) 09:47, 16 August 2009 (UTC) )[reply]

~~Keep~~ , and someone who knows the material should edit. On the present evidence, I am not prepared to say it is an hoax. DGG ( talk ) 07:39, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

seems from the following discussion that it may in fact be a hoax. DGG ( talk ) 05:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Hoax" in this context should be read "Hoax or unverifiable" and for me this entry is unverifiable, unless an expert can demonstrate otherwise. It's post-prod edits like this one that lead me to suspect something fishy is going on. Hairhorn (talk) 16:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me again remind you of the fact that I am Russian and my English is not perfect. The reason why I changed it from similar to the same, is because there are two branches of the family a junior branch, which uses the same coat of arms and a senior line, that uses the same aswell, besides a second sceptre added to the eagle. And I do not understand why the Russian version of the Skajnowski genolegy is not working. And again let me remind you of the fact, that there are a lot of families that where supposed extinxt, but in fact many of the families, which have roots in the Rurik dynasty in fact still exist through marriages mainly within the nobility to this day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris Vladimirovich Petrov (talk • contribs) 16:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But I should of course have written, that there were 2 lines of the family in the article, and that one of them used the Gorcahkovs coat of arms (junior branch), because of a ancestor they have in common Vladimir I of Kiev and while the other (senior branch) used a similar one. The senior branch even became counts in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth and their descendents exist to this day in present day Poland http://www.moikrewni.pl/mapa/kompletny/skajnowski.html. But currently I do not have enough information to write about both the junior branch, even more as they are supposed to be extinct. According to the Russian link of the genology of the Skajnowski family there are descendence who now live in Poland, Russia, Denmark and France. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boris Vladimirovich Petrov (talk • contribs) 17:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Absence of reliable sources Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 23:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - whether it's a hoax or gospel truth, WP:V is absolute. 81.111.114.131 (talk) 01:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have asked an editor familiar with Russian subject matter to have a look. If we could hold off on deleting for a bit that would be helpful. Thanks. ChildofMidnight (talk) 04:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Single purpose account, an article with sources that are just slightly out of reach, nothing significant on a Google search-- and the someone caught red-handed, by an alert nominator, in borrowing an image from another page. I love the "oh-yeah-the-Gorkachovs-use-that-too" save, very convincing. I don't see why an etymological dictionary of the Polish language would have a history of the Skajnowski family, or any other family for that matter. I can't read Russian either, but the machine translation of the linked article [1] is here, and I don't see no Skajnowskis. Beyond that, what is there to examine? Sorry, Boris Vladimirovich, but I don't believe it. Mandsford (talk) 16:10, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I did find the arms thing significant. Even early students of heraldry know that no two families take the same arms. Two branches of the same family may have subtly different arms, and two families coming together will sometimes take new arms reflecting aspects of both to depict the unity. 81.110.104.91 (talk) 23:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 22:59, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 03:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 03:02, 30 August 2009 (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.