Disproven Existence - St_Sauveur-7

+6 votes
117 views
Attempts to find any reliably sourced information about this person have failed so far, and I propose that he be moved from the "Uncertain Existence" category to "Disproved Existence."  

As a person who never existed, he will be disconnected from any parents, spouses, and children.  Notation of these relationships, and links to them, will be provided in the biographical narrative under research notes;  if new facts come to light, he can always be re-connected to the global family tree in accordance with the new facts.

If anyone can find some facts about this person, it will be most appreciated.  It won't bring him back to life, but it will bring him back to having lived once!
WikiTree profile: Yves I de Cotentin
asked in Genealogy Help by Jack Day G2G6 Pilot (215k points)
edited by Jillaine Smith

2 Answers

+7 votes
I am all for cutting him off. As discussed on the profile all we know about his "son" Nigel/Neel is his two sons, so Nigel is as far as I can go with accepting a fake/empty profile. On that profile we can discuss any myths or speculations. In fact I've already added some good authorities for dismissing most speculations about who Nigel was, but the scenario we currently have does not even match most of those. The French family apparently being referred to was the subject of recent scholarly discussion reconstructing the family tree and even there, there is no mention of him.
answered by Andrew Lancaster G2G6 Mach 6 (61.1k points)
+1 vote
Sounds good, Jack. I see that the profile is currently PPP, so if it must stay that way, it should be adopted by the Disproven Existence project. (if not we should remove PPP but it should be good to have this one under Disproven Existence, if no other project is interested).

It's been 11 days - do we need to wait longer?
answered by Isabelle Rassinot G2G6 Pilot (194k points)
Isabelle, done.  I have placed the {{Disproven Existence}} template on Yves' profile and de-linked Yves from all wives and children;  he was already delinked from the parents.  I have also added a detailed note to all affected profiles, which may appear to be overkill at the moment, but it gives anyone working on those profiles a detailed explanation of what has happened as well as some sources that may be worth pursuing.  A number of affected profiles are undoubtedly also fictional, and this will help them attain their "disproven" status!

The main effect of PPP is to keep someone from changing the LNAB.  I think the risk of that is low with disproven existence - pre-1500 profiles, so I would suggest removing PPP.  I do believe the Disproven Existence project should be added as a manager to this and any other Disproven Existence project.  That doesn't keep the other PMs from remaining.

.
Thanks, Jack, the profile has been moved into the project.

I've left the PPP on for now (it may be overkill, but it won't hurt). Another effect of PPP is to prevent changing (adding, removing) the parents, unless you are a profile manager or leader or project coordinator. I agree that with pre-1500 profiles the risk is low.

Related questions

+8 votes
6 answers
+10 votes
0 answers
+8 votes
1 answer
+3 votes
1 answer
+5 votes
4 answers
+8 votes
4 answers
158 views asked Nov 1, 2017 in Policy and Style by Jack Day G2G6 Pilot (215k points)

WikiTree  ~  About  ~  Help Help  ~  Search Person Search  ~  Surname:

disclaimer - terms - copyright

...