Talk:Saintignon

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Vicente Saintignon (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. (Identifies as a member of the family below)

conflict of interest

hi there! thanks for reaching out!

I am a member of this family and I dont think I have contributed anything that makes it a conflict of interest. I am very invested in my lineage and want it to be as fairly and accurately represented. the instagram I can agree with, however, my father and i's addition to the family tree is not fallacious. instead it just adds onto the living branch of the family and puts us on the map with our ancestors. I haven't added anything that exaggerates the legacy or detracts from it, just trying to make it more accurate.

thank you for the concern and I would be happy to discuss it further if you'd like!

Sincerely, Vicente de Saintignon — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vicente Saintignon (talk • contribs) 06:45, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Do you realize that "I don[']t think I have contributed anything that makes it a conflict of interest" and "I am very invested in my lineage" contradict one another? If you are "very invested" in something, you axiomatically have a conflict of interest that, even if subconsciously, prevents you from being fully neutral in your point of view. The fact that you are apparently taking this very personally, as though your family is going to be erased from history, or that it is an offense to your and your father's honor that people have pointed out that you do not have encyclopedic notability, is further evidence of the obvious conflict of interest—I would argue that it is impossible for a person to argue that he or she, or a close family member, is or is not encyclopedically notable without there being a conflict of interest mandating your recusal from the Wikipedia article. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edit-war: how-to versus how-NOT-to

note to: User:Melcous, User:Equirax, User:Vicente_Saintignon

There are people who think that the Saintignon family is notable and there are people who think otherwise. How to solve this ? The answer, as usual, is from reading what reliable sources are saying... and discussing the issues here, at the talk page. It is not too difficult to discover that the opinions at both fr:Famille_de_Saintignon and de:Saintignon ^[1] are: notable topic. Both pages are backed up by a large number of references. Therefore, the pure and simple removal of quite all the named people in the en:wp article doesn't seem justified... but their pure and simple reinclusion will not solve the matter. Therefore, I propose the following: let us reinstall the list under discussion for say a week (till 2018-11-21)... it was here at least from 2013, there is no emergency..., AND see if the "includers" use or not this delay to import the references from fr:wp and de:wp. Pldx1 (talk) 12:38, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ nicht mehr at de:Saintignon_(Adelsgeschlecht)

Let me just say for now that 1. the onus in English wikipedia is always on those seeking to include content to provide sources to verify it; and 2. even the French wikipedia article doesn't include the name of Vicente, who has added himself to this article (using instagram as a reference!) in a fairly blatant act of self promotion and in violation of conflict of interest guidelines. At the very least his name should not be re-added to the article. Melcous (talk) 13:00, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suppressing Philippe de Villiers from the Saintignon's list as not notable without requiring the deletion of the en:Philippe de Villiers article itself... was rather surprising.

This is orthogonal to the fact that Vincente Saintignon himself should not be kept since for being a notable Saintignon, being notable is required. Idem for the basketball coach. The others are either living and notable, or deep rooted in History and probably notable (to be sorted out). Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 13:23, 14 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

About the Saint-Ignon's

Dear User:Vicente Saintignon. You have said just above I am very invested in my lineage. I would be interested by documents giving further details about the four

Franz Graf von Saint-Ignon, (died 1745, verw. Hohenfriedberg). GFWM 1738, FML 1741[2]. Inhaber (1743-1745) of the Harrant-Kürassier Regiment.

Karl Graf von Saint-Ignon (died 1750), GFWM 1734, FML 1739, General der Kavalerie (GdK) 1745 [2], Inhaber (1737-1750) of the 4th Kürassier-Regiment.

Joseph Graf von Saint-Ignon (1720-1779, son of Karl), MTO, colonel-commander of the Herzog Württemberg Dragoons (1757), wounded at Kolin, GFWM 1758, FML 1764 [2], Inhaber (1759-1779) of the Merode Dragonerregiments[3].

Johann Graf von Saint-Ignon (1721-1763, son of Karl), MTO, served all his life in the 4th Kürassier-Regiment. Wounded at Kolin, became colonel-commander(1757), GFWM 1758, KG at Torgau 1760, died of wounds in captivity. [4]

Do you have any clue about finding more documents on this topic ? Best regards. Pldx1 (talk) 09:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not so notable, maybe

Eric de Saintignon, lord at Villers-le-Preudhomme is perhaps

https://gw.geneanet.org/alainpierrette?lang=en&iz=6775&p=eric&n=de+saintignon&oc=1

Eric, Chevalier , Seigneur de Villers le Prudhomme, Villers-en-Haye, Rogéville, (1630-1699)

Without someone working hard, probably not salvaged !

Pldx1 (talk) 12:34, 16 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] t mehr at de:Saintignon_(Adelsgeschlecht)

[1]