Talk:Hopwood DePree

Relationship to Hopwoods

Do any sources indicate exactly how he relates to this Hopwood family, i.e. his maternal grandmother was a Hopwood? Unless some kind of detail of this type is given, it rather comes across as just some rich American who happens to be called 'Hopwood' deciding to buy something plausibly 'ancestral' (knowing how the Americans do love their genealogy). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.120.87 (talk) 13:46, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

There are many media statements like 'his family lived there until the 1920s'- if, for example, his last Hopwood ancestor was eight generations ago (and, it seems, on the maternal side?), there's some hyperbole here. There must be countless individuals with at least as much of a claim to calling it 'their ancestral home' as this rich actor, but lacking the funds- probably some much more closely related. It's just hard to see why all the statements about his link to the family are so vague- even his homepage says 'A descendant of English tradition, Hopwood DePree was raised in the United States' etc. You'd think, with this being the thing for which he's apparently most famous based on this article, the details would be important (or, at the very least, HE'D think so, and go into minute detail as enthusiastic genealogists generally do about their own families)- the fact that he doesn't is quite strange. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.2.120.87 (talk) 13:53, 3 March 2019 (UTC)

There's definitely a strong whiff of 'self-mythologising' in every article about this guy and his 'ancestral' home; it doesn't seem like any of these articles actually explain anything about the situation other than implying him to be one of presumably a vast number of descendants of this family. One Telegraph article gives his name as 'Hopwood dePree XIV', which, let's just say, sounds extremely unlikely. Is this name supposed to imply he's the fourteenth individual allegedly called 'Hopwood dePree', which would usually be the case? He seems to have latched on to the number '14' as plausibly 'ancient-lineage-sounding' on the basis that 'I ...learnt that this is where my 14th great-grandfather was born. I was completely moved.' (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/luxury/meet-hopwood-depree-la-actor-has-swapped-hollywood-crumbling). Given that he specifies no other, closer ancestor than this, one reasonably concludes this to constitute the basis of his newfound enthusiasm for his 'heritage'. Still, as the article also notes, 'He is clearly bonkers.' There are literally no other records anywhere that don't relate to him, plus before this whole- ahem- reinvention, his name appeared to be 'Tod'. Fine if he wants to create this story- it hardly causes damage (well, only to truth and historical fact) in any real sense- but the fact that this article just mindlessly endorses the whole rigmarole is a little cringe-inducing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.220.213 (talk • contribs) 00:00, May 27, 2019 (UTC)

Actually, he's completely inconsistent in that he mentions his '14th great-grandfather' in that article, and here https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/09/01/hollywood-hopwood-star-tries-restore-ancestral-pile/ calls himself 'a 14th-generation Hopwood'; if his Hopwood 14th great-grandfather was born there (meaning, presumably, his 15th great-grandfather was also there, at least at some point!), Hopwood dePree would be a 17th-generation 'Hopwood'. He goes on to say, 'members of my family lived in Hopwood Hall from the 15th century until about 100 years ago'; yes, but according to the following details the article presents, 'DePree’s branch of the Hopwood family settled in the US in the 1700s and it is said that George Washington bequeathed land to John Hopwood in 1791. The Hopwood surname was lost when Alcinda Hopwood married Newton Black in the late 19th century'. So the way he's making a big deal of this being 'his birthright' or whatever is rather misleading. Good for him he's got the motivation to try and restore it, at any rate.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.220.213 (talk • contribs) 00:11, May 27, 2019 (UTC)

Well, in line with the whole "Newton Black" part, his grandfather's obituary - https://dykstrafuneralhome.com/obituaries/herbert-black.36123 (his mother's identity is given in his father's obituary, also in the article) - gives us "The son of early American pioneers from England-William Black and Anna Burnham. Mr. Black loved America and was proud of his ancestors who served in the American Revolution, including his great, great, great, grandfather John Hopwood, who was the aide-de-camp to General George Washington. After the Revolution John Hopwood established the town of Hopwood Pennsylvania"; whether this is fully or partially accurate, or just "family tradition", who knows. It looks like John Hopwood himself is the subject of a lot of family stories rather than established facts, based on the sources cited for his article. Either way, his direct link to the Hopwood family is extremely distant! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.164.66 (talk • contribs) 01:28, July 1, 2021 (UTC)

Must be a nuisance for much more closely related, but less wealthy, relatives or even members of the Hopwood family itself, to have to keep reading about this barely-related man harping on about "his" "ancestral home"..! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.164.66 (talk • contribs) 01:29, July 1, 2021 (UTC)

Message left on talk page of user MiddletonOne 17 August 2021 regarding conflict of interest edits/ restoration of vanity content

Are you Hopwood DePree? The edit history of your account indicates a sole focus on articles pertaining to his involvement with Hopwood Hall, and thus a conflict of interest given your username and the location of Hopwood Hall at Middleton. Please see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest and ensure that your edits are marked to indicate conflict of interest. Please refrain from edit warring on these articles when sources other than direct quotation from/ involvement by DePree himself have been cited regarding the nature of his link to the Hopwood family.

I am not Hopwood DePree nor do I have any connection to him whatsoever. Kind regards. If you have any further questions please feel free to contact me about this but the suspected conflict of interest is unfounded as I have never met Hopwood DePree before. Yusufalhadid (talk) 02:22, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Are you the same user as MiddletonOne? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.201.110 (talk) 16:54, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

It bears observing that your editing history is confined almost entirely to this article and one of a man named Al Hadid, presumably a relative of yours, which does not augur particularly well with regard to COI considerations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.201.110 (talk) 16:58, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

i am not middleton one. Yusufalhadid (talk) 00:12, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

i am conerned that sockpuppetry may be taking place on this article concerning user's 88.109.201.110 and 92.2.120.87 who do not even have accounts and are posting as Ip's only and or their ip's when looked up originate from the same part of the southern England for both. This page is at hgih Vandalism risk as referenced information has been added multiple times yet removed by suspect anonymous non account ip's. It would be ideal if an administrator could look into this ASAP and put this page under extended confirmed protection to prevent this from happening any further. Yusufalhadid (talk) 00:55, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

• concerned
• High Yusufalhadid (talk) 00:56, 26 March 2022 (UTC)

IP editors are not considered second-class citizens on Wikipedia per guidelines. There is no necessity for "extended confirmed protection", save to ensure that dePree's promotional insertions are maintained at the current minimum. There seem to be concerted efforts being made to push a certain promotional tone in this article, no doubt connected to dePree's current efforts to fundraise for renovations, his TV show and book, etc. For example, why Yusufalhadid, who professes to have no connection to dePree, is so invested in the extremely lengthy and unencyclopaedic account since edited out of the article is entirely unclear. At any rate, the current article reflects published sources that don't simply rely on dePree's own contradictory and unsubstantiated accounts; the article details his grandfather's alleged descent from John Hopwood, notes this John Hopwood to be of unestablished ancestry (according to published sources referring to his obscure origins), notes dePree's grandfather had told him stories of a "Hopwood Hall" in England, notes that the Hopwood- later Gregge-Hopwood- family pedigrees make no reference to dePree's alleged branch of the family, that possession of the estate left this senior line, and that subsequently dePree, in line with his family tradition, has acquired the property, and with the local council is seeking to renovate it. These are the only salient considerations at hand, not dePree's own contradictory and unverifiable claims of connection to the former owners (in one interview he is a "fourteenth-generation" descendant of a Hopwood Hall Hopwood, in another he refers to his "fourteen-times great-grandfather", two quite different things). Quite why invested parties are so intent on emphasising dePree's legitimacy in this regard is unclear; probably because it makes for a more romantic story in line with the previous very heavily promotional tone the article had, which would naturally drum up interest in the story/ dePree's televised and written versions thereof. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.205.128 (talk) 13:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Or you could be spinning a conspiracy theory based on what seems like a good story to you, in the process unfairly framing and slandering DePree. Multiple reliable sources confirm he has a family connection. How exactly that connection is, or if it meets your standards, is besides the point, we report what reliable sources say. Honestly you seem to be on some sort of campaign to sow doubt and uncertainty by adding all these "claims" and so on. Then you add a COI tag for no other reason than a SPA which is meaningless. Your account is IP-hopping which itself is suspicious. In the end, we rely on reliable sources not our personal opinions:

• "Hopwood DePree signed a contract with the Rochdale Borough Council, the local authority, to assume responsibility for Hopwood Hall. (The Council had first verified his familial bona fides.)" Source: Kaufman, Joanne (18 June 2022). "'Downton Shabby': A Commoner Takes on an English Castle". The New York Times.

If it's good enough for the owners of the estate, Rochdale Borough Council, who have their own historian who did in-depth research, it's good enough for the New York Times, it's good enough for Wikipedia.

This is my conspiracy theory: you think DePress is not really related or only so distant as to be meaningless and he is a Yank interloper who has claimed the right to the estate based on trumped up "bona fides" and it is therefore controversial. But here is the problem: no source contradicts the claims he is related, no source has made it into a controversy, it is completely uncontroversial. The only person making it into a controversy is you, using Wikipedia as your personal platform to spread original research and POV opinions. The only source anywhere on the Internet that has made his claim controversial is Wikipedia, and this due to a single IP-hopping anonymous editor playing at original research. -- GreenC 05:47, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

The IP address "hops" on its own. Nothing nefarious in that. You're perfectly entitled to your own views on DePree, of course, as well as whatever "conspiracy theories" might take your fancy. The facts- which I've endeavoured to present, with citations- are: he claims descent, via his maternal grandfather, from the American Revolutionary War-period John Hopwood, whose origins have been designated "obscure" (it bears observing, his own article presenting nothing more substantial than "family lore" for his only notable element, connection to George Washington); this John Hopwood does not appear in the extensive Hopwood published pedigrees (which in and of itself does not preclude a familial link). DePree has contradicted himself with regard to his Hopwood Hall ancestor being his fourteenth-great-grandfather or fourteen generations ago- two very different things- which doesn't really clarify matters, indeed, muddies the waters considerably and necessarily makes one look askance at his claim. I certainly have no interest in making any further efforts to improve this article given people are so invested in pushing the media version- and what a good story it is, particularly for fundraising/ drumming up visitors!- so have at it. I consider my edits, having balanced out the cloying media-friendly promotional tone, were to the benefit of the article and Wikipedia in general, and, satisfied, leave it at that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.145.166.95 (talk) 23:55, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Hopwood 1.jpg
• Hopwood DePree.png
• Hopwood dupree.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:07, 30 January 2022 (UTC)