Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noble immigration to the United States


 * 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. The argument that no sources discuss the topic as-a-whole are persuasive. Vanamonde (Talk) 17:38, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

Noble immigration to the United States

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

WP:SYNTH / WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Just like other people, nobility migrates as well, to many countries, including the US (though not especially so). A random selection of some examples (including an ambassador, hardly a relevant inclusion) doesn't an article make. Fram (talk) 16:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Royalty and nobility,  and United States of America. Fram (talk) 16:00, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete (with caveat): I came to a similar conclusion as Fram when reviewing the article, and started a discussion on the talk page of the article. Based on my WP:BEFORE on Google Scholar, I think that there's enough coverage in the lens of Nobility in the US (a framing which includes both the presence and legal issues faced by nobility in the US, as well as the existence of informal nobility within US society) to license a creation of that article, and it would almost certainly include a section on immigration. That having been said, while I don't have a problem with suggesting a move-and-rewrite, it's not clear how much of the current content it would make sense to preserve, given the SYNTH nature of the current text. signed,Rosguill talk 16:12, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * including an ambassador, hardly a relevant inclusion I suggest reading the article before AFDing it. The text already explains why an ambassador (Prince Bandar) is counted as an immigrant in addition to being an ambassador: He bought large amounts of real estate not related to his ambassadorial duties, and became so connected with the Cowboys that he bought a seat next to the owner.


 * The nominator could have also read Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud which shows that he remained in the country to serve as unofficial ambassador even after being removed from his post. 3 minutes after this AFD nomination I was done typing this edit which added that information and citation.


 * On the more general subject the immigration of titled foreign persons generates constant, tremendous WP:RS press coverage. I hope no one will seriously try to contest that. As such WP:SYNTH is incorrect and notable examples, already with their own articles, backed up by RS, cannot be WP:INDISCRIMINATE.


 * As I said on Talk:Noble immigration to the United States yesterday to Rosguill scholarly interest really isn't required. WP:V is required and I created the article with RS. However there certainly is scholarly interest and the idea that it doesn't exist may come from something as simple as the wrong search terms. I said I will add such and I will today. Invasive Spices (talk) 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Scholarly interest isn't strictly required, but specific coverage of the topic as a whole is, and scholarly publications are the best place to find it. If there were a bunch of NYT or similar-tier news sources covering the immigration of nobility as a class, rather than as individuals, that would be fine, but neither appear to exist based on my searching. I'm awaiting the scholarly sources you say you have found.signed,Rosguill talk 16:36, 7 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete Almost appears OR; I'm sure over the course of the last 245 years at least a few "nobles" have come to live in the USA, but it's not been discussed at any length that I could find. There was the The Hohenzollerns in America by Stephen Leacock that came to mind but it's fiction. Oaktree b (talk) 19:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * There's nothing almost about it, cobbling together an article about a general phenomenon from coverage of individual (purported) examples of it, where the individual cited pieces of coverage do not discuss any sort of broader trend, is textbook OR. signed,Rosguill talk 19:35, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I've added this text. This shows it's a current (2019) matter of peer-reviewed study, and that this is noted outside the country (Quebec). It's a concept, it's current, it's in a society journal, it's even controversial and the controversy is controversial in other countries.
 * Rosguill: That article is purely about the 1810 proposed amendment I don't see how you can think that. It discusses the phenomenon of the immigration of titled individuals. It discusses the opposition to this phenomenon. It calls this opposition "xenophobia". Should I translate Villeneuve into English? (Copied from Talk:.) Invasive Spices (talk) 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * , je peux lire le francais tres bien. I don't see how the following is about anything other than the 1810 amendment and its recent resuscitation in right-wing discourse: Cette étude porte sur le Titles of Nobility Act, amendement constitutionnel adopté par le Congrès des États-Unis en 1810, mais ratifié par un nombre insuffisant d’États pour devenir partie de la constitution américaine. Peu connu, cet amendement suscite pourtant, depuis l’émergence d’Internet, un intérêt dans certains milieux de la droite antigouvernementale américaine, qui soutient que sa ratification eut lieu, mais fut étouffée par un complot. Cette étude postule que ces théories, quoiqu’erronées, méritent analyse, car elles permettent de comprendre la dynamique de la «pseudo-histoire» propre à certaines sous cultures politiques. Ce faisant, elle rectifie également les faits et met en lumière l’importance, aujourd’hui largement oubliée, de l’enjeu des titres de noblesse dans les États-Unis des XVIIIe et XIXe siècles. I've scanned through the article as a whole and don't see anything that deviates from that scope; are there specific passages with page numbers you'd like to point to? The references I see to xenophobia all appear to refer to the political climate surrounding the proposal of the Titles of Nobility Amendment, and the related passage of the Alien and Sedition Act; I don't see any analysis of a general phenomena of noble immigration to the US, other than brief mentions that the TONA would require nobles renounce their titles as part of a hypothetical path to citizenship. I think that this is an example of a source that would be a good resource for Nobility in the United States, but does not suffice for the creation of an article on nobility's immigration to the US. signed,Rosguill talk 21:06, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I see. Cette étude porte sur le Titles of Nobility Act the paper is going to only be about the amendment and not about the fact that the thing it was against does actually exist. That would, however, be a very short paper.
 * As in the edit I am most significantly talking about p99: En 1803, Jérôme Bonaparte, frère cadet de Napoléon temporairement installé à New York ... Baltimore ... In 1803, Jerome Bonaparte, younger brother of Napoleon, temporarily moving to New York ... founded his family in Baltimore ...
 * Invasive Spices (talk) 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that example is again, too specific for what we're looking for. The fact that an RS has documented that a noble immigrated to the US is not enough to license the creation of an article on the abstract concept of noble immigration to the US, and the paper is specifically citing that example for its immediate relevance to the proposal of the TONA, the main focus of the paper. For a topic like this to be notable and OR-free, you would need to draw on sources that cover the phenomenon as a whole. Examples of such sources for other, analogous topics would be Mexican Immigration to the US (for Mexican immigration), Mothering for Class and Ethnicity: The Case of Indian Professional Immigrants in the United States (for Tamil, or specifically Tamil Brahmin, immigration), papers/books which directly identify the population they are analyzing as a population. You can find some sources that discuss nobility in the US in this way, but I have been unable to find any that discuss noble immigrants or the emigration of nobility in this fashion. signed,Rosguill talk 22:05, 7 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I have added Hart and new quotes from Villeneuve. I think these are clearly more specific to titled immigration, and they add text about the 1795 act. By the way I don't think Emerald books are peer reviewed. Anyway I would like to have such sources but right now I am editing to respond to the critics to avoid deletion. Invasive Spices (talk) 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * That article is more about the TONA and the context of rediscovery with the internet and xenophobia bla bla. That could be an interesting article if you had a few more papers about it. You could merge this stub into that. Oaktree b (talk) 00:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * More about yes. But I'm facing the charge that I haven't established immigration of titled individuals exists as a concept, so I'm trying to use a RS (now 2 ) to establish existence. Hopefully someone else will also use these source in that article. Invasive Spices (talk) 8 November 2022 (UTC)
 * The addition of yet another source that does not discuss the actual phenomenon of noble immigration, and instead solely discusses the circumstances surrounding the passage of the TONA, suggests that either you still fundamentally don't understand our objections or have decided to WP:IDHT. signed,Rosguill talk 00:18, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * yet another source that does not discuss the actual phenomenon of noble immigration, and instead solely discusses the circumstances surrounding the passage of the TONA It does not. I provided quotes to make this easier. [A different statute] fear that former French nobility fleeing the French Revolution would come to the United States and reestablish themselves as a privileged class is about the TONA circumstances?
 * I am not IDHT. I was trying to move toward a solution without getting bogged down in what I think is a secondary question: I think this is your preference Rosguill. I would like to have sources titled Immigration of Hereditary Upper Class Persons Into The United States however I don't believe that is necessary and I thought my reply made that sufficiently clear. Is this your demand alone or am I missing something in WP:SYNTH? I have been given the impression by the relevant WP: pages that I must establish existence of the concept. I think the sources I provided have established that more strongly, and the quotes provided by my latest edit definitely. Are you really still contesting whether I've established existence of the phenomenon?
 * If I can't use any RS to establish existence then yes I haven't understood SYNTH but certainly [Different statute] foreign emigrant ... who had borne a title of nobility should satisfy your demand. Invasive Spices (talk) 9 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Almost a day later and I hope the quotes made my point. Since then I have also added 3 more sources with quotes. All are peer-reviewed, 2 articles, 1 book. These all overview the general experience of immigrants and the immigration process, and are not about any specific examples. Invasive Spices (talk) 10 November 2022 (UTC)
 * (Anyway Mexican immigration and Tamil Brahmin immigration are hilarious examples. Very well done Rosguill.)

This study concerns the Titles of Nobility Act [sic], a constitutional amendment adopted by the US Congress in 1810, but ratified by an insufficient number of states to become part of the American Constitution. Little known, this amendment has nevertheless resurfaced, following the emergence of the Internet, as a point of interest for certain milieus of the American anti-government right wing, which assert that the ratification took place but was covered up by a conspiracy. This study suggests that these theories, although erroneous, merit study, as they allow us to understand the dynamics of "pseudo-history" manifest in certain political cultures. In doing so, it also clarifies the facts and brings to light the importance, today largely forgotten, of the importance of the question of noble titles in the US during the 18th and 19th centuries


 * Leaning delete, as this is already adequately covered by American royalty. BD2412  T 01:03, 8 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete This replicates the information on American royalty which is precisely about this topic. If there are sources here that would enhance that page they could be added there. Lamona (talk) 04:54, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I really don't know how anyone could get that idea after reading the article. Neither "American" nor "royalty" fits with this article.
 * Although some of the subjects of this article become American citizens, Diane von Fürstenberg is the only one on the list who has. That article appropriately focuses on those who begin as Americans and also mentions those who become Americans, not mentioning those who are only permanent residents notable for their permanent residence in the country. That especially doesn't cover Bandar bin Sultan Al Saud who is more influential in American foreign policy than almost any American, and who has bought a seat next to the owner of his favorite American team, but is not expected by anyone to ever change his citizenship.
 * That article says it will limit itself to royalty. Already there's a problem because Diane von Fürstenberg is an "immigrant with a noble title but no royal title". I haven't checked to see if there are any others who aren't but there's one. This article more broadly covers "hereditary noble immigrants" and the entire "subject of their immigration". The legal history generates continued interest and controversy into the present day and is completely outside of that article's scope. This article appropriately includes individuals such as DvF, whose immigration experience is interesting and notable but who is not a "royal immigrant". Invasive Spices (talk) 12 November 2022 (UTC)
 * I've started a thread about that problem here Talk:American royalty. — Invasive Spices (talk) 12 November 2022 (UTC)


 * 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.