Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skanke


 * 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 No consensus. This is a tricky one. The real question here is the quality of the sources. The argument for keeping this appears to rest pretty much entirely on a single author, G.V.C. Young. (A google search was also cited, but a simple list of google results can't be a reliable source. Some of the results may be sources, but no one appears to have done the evaluations to say which ones should qualify, if any.) One of the two editors favoring keep states that he couldn't find any significant work by this author in a major university library, nor any other author who cites him. However a "google scholar" search lists multiple works by this author, with multiple citations of some works. A regular web search lists multiple books published by this author, and at least some references to them by others who appear to take him seriously as a researcher. So i feel that I cannot simply discount this set of sources. Thus the reliability of the sources here is a judgment call, and there is no clear consensus to delete either on arguments or on numbers (3:2 for deletion). The article is kept by default, but that is not a consensus endorsement. DES (talk) 15:44, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Skanke
The article is a hoax and consists of pure fiction. There doesn't even exist a single family called Skanke, and there was never any noble family called Skanke, nor are those using that surname the rulers of Man or anywhere else. See also Talk:Skanke Family Association. Luvente 15:09, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * BJAODN, rather elaborate hoax at work here. Ten Pound Hammer  • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 16:52, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: At least a partial hoax by the look of it (ie the info relating to Royal connections). Unfortunately, without that, the article subject becomes non-notable. EyeSereneTALK 18:49, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * And what about the Manx history works which support the case? They're just to be ignored?Manxruler 10:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. These do not appear to be reliable, independent sources per WP:ATT. That would put much of the article in the realm of original research. EyeSereneTALK 09:10, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I advise you to read the Norwegian article, which states that there are no documented links to any other country than Norway. Speculation based on similarity in coat of arms, or rather based on the fact that some adopted an existing coa of their liking, does not make the un-special Skanke family the royal family of Man. Luvente 12:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I advise you read the Swedish article . Manxruler 19:51, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep - see [Google Surname search Skanke] How can there be no surname? Can so many geneology sites be wrong? Shureley shome mishtake. Mike33 11:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No straw men, please! There are several, unrelated, un-royal, un-noble and un-special families that are using the name Skanke. There is no such thing as the Skanke family which is royal and rulers of Man etc. etc. Support BJAODN. Luvente 12:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * More sources to come - Tomorrow I'll add some more sources, I've requested them, and their on their way to me as we speak. Manxruler 11:28, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * "Sources" that are original research/propaganda/bullshit published by the "Skanke Family Association", like the other you provided? I rest my case. Luvente 12:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * More like a book written by the respected historian G. V. C. Young (O.B.E.) and published by Mansk-Svenska Publishing Company Ltd. in Peel, Isle of Man . Its funny how, with absolutely no evidence to the contrary you chose to totally disregard Manx history books. Should not Manx historians have a certain idea of their own history? Stop wrecking the page, removing sourced material is not good editing. Manxruler 17:47, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Since books by noted and established authors should be considered by all as proper source material I intend to rewrite the article using only said books. That should prove satisfactory to all. It won't change much, the core will be the same, just with a few less details. Since this will require some work, I'll do it tomorrow and leave the repair job on the wrecked article till then. Manxruler 19:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Obviously you don't even read your own dubious "sources". For example the book by Robelin (the only somewhat credible source, although still highly problematic according to Norwegian genealogists, including Tore Hermundsson Vigerust) state the exact opposite of what you are claiming. There are several, not one, Skanke families, and Robelin clearly state that no connection between the various Skanke families and the Isle of Man have been established (page 13). So why do you continue claiming "the" Skanke family is "Irish" and "noble" when they are Norwegian and commoners? Luvente 09:03, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I actually didn't add Robelin, some else did. But I believe the actual wording is: As far as time has allowed he could not find evidence. Manxruler 18:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Furthermore, Robelin actually suggest a link with noble families in Pomerania and Mecklenburg. Still noble. Manxruler 18:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * What kind of "link"? A "link" doesn't make you noble. Either you are noble, or you are not. In 1824 all (former) noble families living in Norway were registered by the Storting. Skanke was not one of them. Anyway, what happened to Man? I presume you are going to change your user name to "Mecklenburg ruler" now? Luvente 23:45, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Is this purely a dispute about historians? If so, it has no place on Afd. Both historians should be mentioned in the article with differing opinions. I can probably find 50 respected historians who differ about Scandanavian influence in the north-west of England. Pre norman conquest/post norman conquest/pre/post dublin etc. Encyclopedias echo those facts or nonfacts depending on the historian.


 * I do have some trouble though, Young has never been quoted by any other Manx historian. I am not saying that his research was bad, but with three libraries this morning Manchester University, Manchester Metropolitan University and Manchester Central Library, I was unable to find a single book from him apart from a paper he wrote for the North West Archeological Society (Volume 5 1993) and not about this subject. Mik e 33 -  t @ lk  19:23, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

It is not a dispute among historians, it is not a special family, or more correctly: a special group of unrelated families sharing the same name, of any kind. The most prominent person with this name in recent times is a rally cross driver and right-wing local politician. Sources cited are amateur genealogists. Amateur genealogy is quite a big industry in Norway, and in the early 20th century it was popular to claim that one's family descended from Viking era kings and so forth. A connection between one of these families and Man has never been established in any way, it is only wishful thinking of some family members. I would guess it exists thousands of families which, like this one, in the past claimed to be the descendants of some kings, based on wishful thinking. Scandinavian influence on the British islands is completely irrelevant for this article, as none of the Skanke families have anything to do with Britain. Luvente 23:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

{subst:ab}}