This article was nominated for deletion on 8 November 2023. The result of the discussion was redirect.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
This redirect is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany 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.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
There are those who would even dispute reference to this man as the Count zu Solms-Wildenfels, given the status of historical hereditary titles in Germany, but that usage can at least be documented from references to reliable sources. The attribution to him of the title "Prince of Schwarzburg" is mind-boggling in the many levels of error it propagates. First, there is no evidence that he claims, uses or even knows of this title. Second, "Prince of Schwarzburg" was the proper title of the sovereigns of a nation of that name until 1918, which ceased to exist from that date. Third, the application of semi-Salicism to his mother in order to deduce and state in Wikipedia that Friedrich Magnus inherited this title through her after the aboliton of the monarchy of Schwarzburg is not only a biased point of view, but seriously and deliberately misleads readers of this encyclopedia into believing non-truths: Semi-Salicism is a complicated kind of inheritance rule, which existed in several different forms: to know which is applicable here would require a scholarly and legal analysis of the law adopted in 1896 as contrasted with German Private Princely law. At best, Friedrich Magnus is a pretender to the throne of the abolished Principality of Schwarzburg. Fourth, the rationale for this article is openly taken from the Schwarzburg pages on François Velde's website Heraldica.org. While his speculations on the claim of Friedrich Magnus are scholarly in nature, neutral and well-sourced, he does not declare this man to be Prince of Schwarzburg, if for no other reason than that Velde's historical research led him to conclude that another man, Philipp, 5th Prince zu Stolberg-Wernigerode would have a very strong claim to the principality, if it existed, and to the title, if there were any lawful authority to adjudicate his rights in comparison to those of Friedrich Magnus. The arguments on these potential claims may be of interest, but any conclusions are entirely speculative and impossible to consider definitive. For Wikipedia to be used (apparently by promoters of their own/favorite websites and by a notoriously unreliable and biased replica of history's most authoritative series on royalty/royal titles) to disseminate royalist disinformation as if it were fact is a disservice to this encyclopedia, to royal scholarship and to history. Congratulations Wikipedia, you have unwittingly joined the scores of those who peddle False titles of nobility to an unsuspecting public! FactStraight (talk) 09:28, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.