Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fraters Armigeri Hospitalis


 * 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. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:40, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Fraters Armigeri Hospitalis

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I doubt the notability of this 16 members organization; the long section on its assumed history does not mention the organization at all and the name is wrong latin (Fraters instead of Fratres). jergen 09:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment: removed the afd-notice from the article . --jergen 11:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Every organisation started small Jergen, besides that we are indeed on this moment an 16 active members but we represent on this moment already around a 150 different families due to our Historic research. In the year 1931 an Dutch Historian did do an research in Holland alone by what he came to the amazing conclusion that in Holland their were an 45.000 families alone who’s ancestors did belong to the lower nobility in Holland but who’s descendants were not recognized by the High Council of Nobility. Is it not strange that an “inherited right” suddenly vanishes? Like our website explains it, we make an statement and fight as an Entity for our rights. But how large our group will become, or how many families we represent (maybe your own family?) is on this moment not to tell. But if you say size matters, than I dare to say we represent an 5.000 members as when we reached that amount we will approach than the different Institutes of Nobility again.

Besides that Jergen, you already have an say in the German Wikipedia so in this case I don't think here is your place to write this comment.

J. Sieroversche —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.166.84.130 (talk) 10:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC) My deepest appoligy for my reaction on yesterday by the way but I was suddenly confronted that an article that I just 15 minutes before started to write was already on the list for deletion on the German site and than also certainly confronted that the same person also nominated my other articles for deletion. Of course I do agree with the Experts of Wikipedia what articles have an value to be mentioned in an encyclopaedia. In this we conform ourselves to the opinion of the majority. Sieroversche. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.166.84.130 (talk) 08:39, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. The history section is all about the Knights Hospitaller, the Knights Templar and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, and if there's any verifiable sourced information here that's missing from those articles it should be merged. The organisation which this article is about was founded in 2006, has 16 members and a complete lack of notability.  Looks like a bit of da-Vinci-Code-cruft to me. Phil Bridger 10:12, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, thanks. AnteaterZot 10:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. and Phil Bridger. JohnCD 11:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Although history proof you wrong concerning the notability and I disagree on the point that how it seems we only are allowed to have an article when we reached our 5000 active membership goal, I am tired of this discussion. So yes please delete it and remember that if anyone ever wants to write an article about us again, we hold the copyright. Sieroversche. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.166.84.130 (talk) 12:07, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: See WP:COPYRIGHT and our policy about legal threats. shoy  (words words) 13:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - without more specific citations, sounds too much like one of the Mimic orders.  Exit2DOS2000   •T•C•  06:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment:

Much is said and the general opinion is clear but first let us say we are not claiming to be a mimic order of knighthood or nobility. We don´t ask money and never will be as it goes against our policy. What than? Please see the discussionpage that i will open now to make it clear. Sieroversche.
 * Comment: see discussion or talkpage at the main article


 * 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.