Talk:Suzane von Richthofen

Relation to Richthofen Family(Red Baron) in Germany
The only authority on the relations of Manfred Von Richthofen is his family. They have a well documented list of relatives and they deny any relation to this girls father. So, I think it is a case where even BBC couldn't help themselves and nobody wanted to check with the family. It was too good to be wrong, you see. Anyway, unless someone can show where on the family tree this man lies, which the Richthofens say you can't do I think we should be careful to soak up this sort of tabloid story excuse to talk about the REd Baron in a murder case. Also, how far removed in relation can you be before it is irrelevant to the story?JohnHistory (talk) 22:43, 5 May 2009 (UTC)JohnHistory

Who is calling all these people "Freiherr" and "Freiin"? They are not nobles nor is Brazil a monarchy, and besides that they are not known in Brazil by these titles. I would suggest to have these titles removed. 12.158.118.68 (talk) 00:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * In Brazil, for inheritance purposes you are considered a relative up to the fourth degree. After that, you could no longer be called a legal family member. But this does not exclude that they shared a relative centuries ago. Aldo L (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Wealth
In the section Background and early life, it says the net worth of the Richtofen clan is about 5.5 million dollars. Then it says her father opened an account for her with 30 million Euros. Then in the section Motives, it says her parents wealth is about 17 million dollars. So which of these figures is correct? If she had a bank account of 30 million Euros, why commit a murder to inherit at most half that sum? --Marjaliisa (talk) 00:31, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Good questions. In addition, the source cited for the '30 million euros' claim actually says 'At least 10 million euros', which is not quite the same thing! GoldenRing (talk) 09:28, 22 July 2013 (UTC)


 * I've edited this paragraph to better reflect the source. However, the article overall has serious sourcing problems.  Only three of the cites link to actual sources, the rest being broken.  Of these, one is a BBC article with not much detail.  Another is a news site in Portuguese which Google Translate makes a decent fist of and provides a few more details.  The third looks like a news video, also in Portuguese - hard to use for a non-Portuguese-speaker.  Unless that video provides a lot of information, most of the article cites no (working) sources. GoldenRing (talk) 10:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Suzane von Richthofen. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070707055754/http://ultimosegundo.ig.com.br:80/paginas/cadernoi/materias/164001-164500/164155/164155_1.html to http://ultimosegundo.ig.com.br/paginas/cadernoi/materias/164001-164500/164155/164155_1.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 19:00, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, she is part of German aristocracy
Now that JohnHistory was banned for trolling and lying, the truth that he removed could return to the article. Suzane von Richthofen is part of German aristocracy and descendant of the prominent WW1 pilot Red Baron. This has been vastly investigated and proved, the fact that this shames other descendants of the German aristocracy does not justify this censorship. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5207124.stm BarbarianAshamedLiar (talk) 20:46, 9 February 2019 (UTC)


 * If we are to state categorically that the murderer of her parents is related to the aristocratic family with the same name, in spite of the denials of the family themselves, then we need a reliable source for this. (A vague reference to "vastly investigated and proved" is not enough - we need a reliable sources in the Wikipedia sense). It is categorically physically impossible for anyone to be a "direct descendant of Manfred von Richthofen (The Red Baron)" since he was killed when he was only 22 and never married. So any source claiming "direct descent" is obviously poorly researched (as journalistic articles VERY often are) and certainly not "reliable". A direct descendant of a third cousin, or something like that, is of course quite another matter (some of the people who ARE mentioned in the Richthofen family article are no closer related than that).
 * Use of the same surname is, in itself, very far from being "proof" of relationship. There is in fact in most counties little or nothing to stop the adoption of a surname, even one implying an aristocratic connection, by anyone.
 * Suzane's father has been quoted (by a Brazilian magazine) as follows.
 * This account is very garbled and full of inconsistencies, although allowing for "family mythology" it might just pass as identifying the murdered father as a descendant of Wolfram Freiherr von Richthofen. Even in this case, there are so many inconsistencies in his claims (Like, his father died years before the date he was allegedly born.
 * Newspapers are (on the whole) very bad sources for an encyclopedia: the function of a newspaper and that of an encyclopedia are just too disparate. That something "just might be true" doesn't mean it is encyclopedic - and just because it creates a brief sensation in the media doesn't mean, by any means, that it is going to be notable in the long run. To paraphrase WP:NOT (a useful guideline and well worth reading) - When in doubt (especially but not exclusively about factuality) leave it out. In the words of my old mum "If you can't say something nice, say nothing". Some unpleasant truths MUST be told, obviously, but we have to be very careful about the notability (in the encyclopedic sense) of scandal. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Newspapers are (on the whole) very bad sources for an encyclopedia: the function of a newspaper and that of an encyclopedia are just too disparate. That something "just might be true" doesn't mean it is encyclopedic - and just because it creates a brief sensation in the media doesn't mean, by any means, that it is going to be notable in the long run. To paraphrase WP:NOT (a useful guideline and well worth reading) - When in doubt (especially but not exclusively about factuality) leave it out. In the words of my old mum "If you can't say something nice, say nothing". Some unpleasant truths MUST be told, obviously, but we have to be very careful about the notability (in the encyclopedic sense) of scandal. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 18:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)