Talk:Radu Duda, Prince of Hohenzollern-Veringen/Archive 1

message: Radu Duda was acting professionally for 20 years at least, see: 
*	
"Interpretul dificilului personaj este actorul român Radu Duda – ieşeanul format la Academia de Teatru şi Film din Bucureşti, debutând în 1982 la Teatrul Mic şi producându-se apoi în cele mai mari roluri ale Naţionalului din Iaşi."
 
*	
Laissez-passer (2002)(A film of Bertrand Tavernier) Cast, Crew, Reviews, Plot Summary, Comments, Discussion, ... Radu Duda.....etc.
: "Actor pana in 1999, a devenit membru al Casei Regale." (Prince Radu website) Also, in a public interview, Radu Duda stated that he had acted for 25 years between 1974 and 1999, obviously beginning as a high-schooler (he was born in 1960): "In anul 1996 (...) nu intentionam sa renunt la profesia pe care o slujeam din ziua de 14 ianuarie 1974. (...) De aceea nu am deloc nostalgia celor 25 de ani in care am slujit scena, ca lume."  However, since a career presupposes a professional degree, Radu's career started only with his college graduation in 1984 and lasted until 1999 according to his confession, for a maxium of, thus, 14+ years. If Duda's fans Marina C. and others want to speak of a "25 years" figure, of which 10 years were at the amateur unprofessional level (not part of a professional career) -- between 1974 and 1984 --, then they should not use the term "career." Carbunar 19:07, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well the facts prove that he acted from 1982 (Teatrul Mic) until 2002 (the Tavernier film) so Radu is wrong in his calculations.  Remove "career" if you want, I didn't draft that part.  You can have a career, for example, also as a volunteer in the charitable sector, so if he was acting while a student, on a "professional" stage as it were, and to spectators who paid to see the performance, then that is part of a career.  But I don't mind if you want to change the word.
Marina E.Cummings 14:58, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Acting career 

message: A couple of quotes from a French book, as reference,  showing that the sisters met rarely together long before Radu and Margarita had married. They had all grown up and had families of their own. 
The title of the book is:TOI MA SOEUR
The Author: ELLSEN ISABEL
Published by:LA MARTINIERE,Paris,France
Published  date: 01/10/1998
ISBN:2-7324-2413-7
*http://fr.bookbutler.com/do/bookSearch;jsessionid=836DB593D1FA337B4C9E55EC9889557E?pageNr=1&showMore=true&sortBy=salesrank&searchFor=ISBN%3A2-7324-2413-7&searchBy=isbn&searchIn=de&shipTo=de&amountIn=eur
*http://www.livres-chapitre.com/-J079NQ/-ELLSEN-ISABEL/-TOI-MA-SOEUR.html
Pp182 S.A.R. La princesse Margarita de Roumanie: “Aux quatre coins du monde”
“Bucarest” - et si c’était possible que ce lieu puisse enfin réunir magiquement toute ma famille: mon père, ma mère et nous, leurs cinq filles?
Hélène, Irina, Sophie, Marie.
Mes quatre soeurs éparpillées aux quatre coins du monde.
Pendant notre enfance nous étions très proches toutes les cinq…(….)
La dernière fois que nous avons été toutes ensemble, ce fut en 1982, réunies dans le deuil et la douleur autour du cercueil de notre grand-mère, la Reine Hélène.
(…)
Cinq soeurs soudées et pourtant condamnées à ne pouvoir que “correspondre” pour être ensemble et vaincre les distances et l’exil.
(…)
Cinq soeurs unies grâce aux surprises de la vie qui sont parfois plus extraordinaires que nos rêves ou nos espoirs: après seize ans, toutes ensemble dans le grand salon de la maison de Bucarest, autour de l’arbre de Noël, le grand escalier en bois...
(…)
Noël 1997… c’était à Bucarest, à Bucarest.
Marina C (2) 22:12, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Franck's allegations about Radu having driven away the King's daughters

message: The article needs a cleanup: It does not read like an Encyclopedia entry: it contains all sorts of minute details about Radu Hohenzollern that are useless and POV , it needs balancing.  I started cleanup of the article befor tagging it, which I am doing now, as the more I advance in the cleanup, the more I see that the article needs this process.  I also see that Stefanp and some of his sockpuppets  such as Carbunar, John Mathis,MihutM have been editing here, so a cleanup is certainly in order.Marina C (2) 20:00, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Stop blanking well-referenced statements that contradict your pro-Radu views. This is sheer vandalism! Miron25 04:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: Proof from "May 10 - Sad Destiny, Memorable Date" (in Romanian), Dilema Veche, May 12, 2006 (quote in Romanian): "Ce mai face restul familiei? Aici e-aici: nimeni nu ştie. (...) Supraexpunerea prinţului Radu - oricît de potrivit ar fi d-sa pentru rolul de vlăstar regal - a condus la o suspectă tăcere în privinţa celorlalţi. (...) Or, de la o vreme, pe cît de omniprezent e Radu, pe atît de absentă e Margareta." 
Translation in English: "How is the rest of the family doing? This is it: nobody knows. (...) Prince Radu's over-exposure -- however suited he may be for the role of a royal offshoot -- has led to a suspect silence regarding the others. (...) Lately, the more omnipresent Radu is, the more absent Margareta is." 
Further proofs of Radu's public representation of the Royal Family most often alone and unaccompanied by neither Margarita, nor other royals, can be found in his public agenda. Miron25 04:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: "Most often alone"

message: Here are the sources used to qualify Securitate as "dreaded":
1. "(...) the apparent life-and-death struggle between the Army on the side of the People and the dreaded Securitate" ("The “Timisoara” Syndrome and the Modern Media," BRITISH HELSINKI HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP)
2. "The man who had taken me there was from the dreaded Securitate." ("A Romanian Looks at Her Secret File (Why Few Do)," London Daily Telegraph, December 2, 2004)
3. "journalists and other public figures collaborated with the dreaded Securitate." ("007 News," AXIS INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS, January 3, 2007) Miron25 00:32, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "The Dreaded ''Securitate''" 

message: :Image:Cifrul ASR Principelui Radu.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 19:39, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Cifrul ASR Principelui Radu.JPG

message: The neutrality label (instead of immediate deletion, which is warranted) was re-inserted because of this statement: "The scandal is believed to have been instigated by a descendant of King Carol II and friend of the Hereditary Prince, Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern[54]", which besmirches Paul-Philippe Hohenzollern. WP:BLP requires, "Editors must take particular care adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page. Such material requires a high degree of sensitivity...We must get the article right.[1] Be very firm about the use of high quality references. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles,[2] talk pages, user pages, and project space. An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is 'do no harm'." The source cited appears to be an evangelical freemason site that lacks the high credibility necessary to be used as a source accusing someone of deliberately injuring another person's reputation. The allegation also violates WP:NPOV because it is a one-sided view, attributing sabotage against Duda to Paul, the political and dynastic rival of Duda's father-in-law -- with no hint as to whether Paul accepts that accusation. Whereas NPOV requires "the fair, analytical description of all relevant sides of a debate, including the mutual perspectives". (Also, since Stefanp's been banned, I suspect that there is a lot of anti-Radu material in this article that needs to be cleaned out.) Lethiere (talk) 11:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fine, you can keep the neutrality label. However, you should know that the daily Ziua used to reference this statement is a very high-quality, very reliable investigation journal. No question here of reliability. For a non-Romanian like yourself, you should perhaps ask around for more opinions on this Romanian source before going ahead with such an unwarranted decision such as deleting the statement. Paul Philippe is somebody who is not a stranger at all to such dirty attacks on the Romanian royals: in 2006 he asked for his uncle, King Michael, to be executed for crimes against the Jews during WWII! He went as far as to lobby the measure in Israel's Parliament! So his "milder" attack on Radu's title is all the more believable, especially when coming from such a reputable source like Ziua. Lil' mouse (talk) 04:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Accusation of "scandal-mongering"