Talk:Rothschild loans to the Holy See
Latest comment: 1 year ago by Uanlov in topic Loan amount
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 1 August 2019. The result of the discussion was keep. |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rothschild loans to the Holy See article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg)
OR: Catholic—Jewish relations
editI tagged this section as it seems to be WP:SYNTH / WP:OR - it is unclear that sources tie these anti-Jewish persecutions to the loans under discussion here.Icewhiz (talk) 05:18, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
- It is crystal clear the sources say the Rothschilds asked the Pope to lift long-standing restrictions on the 15,000 Jews living in the domains of the Holy See. As the only link that existed between the Pope and the lenders was _these_loans_, this subset of facts (at least) is legitimately tied to the article. While I agree that revision of the section is warranted, its wholesale destruction and that of the references is not. XavierItzm (talk) 06:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- The section was tagged it hasn't undergone "wholesale destruction" - yet. Most of it, however, should go - as the events chronicled (other than the Rothschild plea to halt oppression of Jews in the papal states that you mention above) - are not related to the loan. Icewhiz (talk) 06:37, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- Icewhiz, the entire following para to the plea you cite above is just as germane. Note: "Matternich relayed the information to the Pope that the request had come from Rothschild." Given this, the response of the Holy See to the various R. pleas, which is the final para, is also entirely DUE. Having said this, there is, as always, room for improvement in the whole section. XavierItzm (talk) 21:41, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- I am in favor of removing everything following the phrase "for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions" and ending that paragraph with a general statement saying the request was denied.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:14, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- So you'd delete "Matternich relayed the information to the Pope that the request had come from Rothschild." and associated following para's, together with the book sources? XavierItzm (talk) 19:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, because the relevance is low and the information is already summarized in the "for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions" sentence. If you wanted to add in a mention of Metternich to the sentence I would be okay with that, such as "Through the Austrian Crown Prince Matternich the Rothschilds asked the Pope for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions"--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:01, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Now, since you'd be the one deleting the material, and you acknowledge "Through the Austrian Crown Prince Matternich the Rothschilds asked the Pope for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions" is valuable, encyclopedic material, wouldn't be the onus on you to not delete this valuable, encyclopedic sentence in order to meet WP:PRESERVE? I mean, I can't believe you wrote "If you wanted to add" with regard to a sentence and cit. that already exists. XavierItzm (talk) 07:18, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you are willing to trim this section, it is less likely this article will be put up for deletion in the coming years. The extended background discussion of this section appears to bother deletionists, it is possible to compromise instead of removing the entire section.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:11, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- I agree the section can be trimmed. As I said above in my first comment: "revision of the section is warranted". In another comment, I said: "there is, as always, room for improvement in the whole section". XavierItzm (talk) 07:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- Okay, I'll trim it, and then you can re-add anything important that I missed.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 03:09, 14 August 2019 (UTC)
- I agree the section can be trimmed. As I said above in my first comment: "revision of the section is warranted". In another comment, I said: "there is, as always, room for improvement in the whole section". XavierItzm (talk) 07:38, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you are willing to trim this section, it is less likely this article will be put up for deletion in the coming years. The extended background discussion of this section appears to bother deletionists, it is possible to compromise instead of removing the entire section.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:11, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Now, since you'd be the one deleting the material, and you acknowledge "Through the Austrian Crown Prince Matternich the Rothschilds asked the Pope for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions" is valuable, encyclopedic material, wouldn't be the onus on you to not delete this valuable, encyclopedic sentence in order to meet WP:PRESERVE? I mean, I can't believe you wrote "If you wanted to add" with regard to a sentence and cit. that already exists. XavierItzm (talk) 07:18, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- Yes, because the relevance is low and the information is already summarized in the "for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions" sentence. If you wanted to add in a mention of Metternich to the sentence I would be okay with that, such as "Through the Austrian Crown Prince Matternich the Rothschilds asked the Pope for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions"--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:01, 10 August 2019 (UTC)
- So you'd delete "Matternich relayed the information to the Pope that the request had come from Rothschild." and associated following para's, together with the book sources? XavierItzm (talk) 19:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- I am in favor of removing everything following the phrase "for a number of concessions towards Jews living in the Papal dominions" and ending that paragraph with a general statement saying the request was denied.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 04:14, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- Icewhiz, the entire following para to the plea you cite above is just as germane. Note: "Matternich relayed the information to the Pope that the request had come from Rothschild." Given this, the response of the Holy See to the various R. pleas, which is the final para, is also entirely DUE. Having said this, there is, as always, room for improvement in the whole section. XavierItzm (talk) 21:41, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- The section was tagged it hasn't undergone "wholesale destruction" - yet. Most of it, however, should go - as the events chronicled (other than the Rothschild plea to halt oppression of Jews in the papal states that you mention above) - are not related to the loan. Icewhiz (talk) 06:37, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
- It is crystal clear the sources say the Rothschilds asked the Pope to lift long-standing restrictions on the 15,000 Jews living in the domains of the Holy See. As the only link that existed between the Pope and the lenders was _these_loans_, this subset of facts (at least) is legitimately tied to the article. While I agree that revision of the section is warranted, its wholesale destruction and that of the references is not. XavierItzm (talk) 06:20, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Loan amount
editI add this because I found a discrepany between what the Rothschild family´s page states in terms of how much the loan would be worth today (£400,000, worth €43,000,000 in 2014) and what this page says (equivalent to £4 billion in 2021). What are the sources and which amount is more realistic? Uanlov (talk) 20:21, 6 November 2023 (UTC)