Talk:Barbaro family/Archive 1

Archive 1

"Golden Books of Venetian Nobility"

There are no such books, according to Google. I would like to see some ISBNs for a lot of the other references. The "Golden Books of Venetian Nobility" is also being used to source another, hoaxish article with no reliable sources, and therefore I have my doubts about this, as well. This article needs to be reverted a long ways back to its earliest beginnings and verifiable sources re-added. Corvus cornix 22:45, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

• Ecuse me butting in here, there most certainly was a Libro d'Oro recording the nobility of most of the Italian city states, including Venice. Giano 10:16, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• • Giano, the Golden Books the fraudster refers to are not from the 14th century. This is a made up version of the real thing. We've been all over this elsewhere. Apparently the center of some kind of hoax focuses on a made up nobleman named VV Barbaro who, the hoaxer claims, is alive today and so could not be in the actual Libro d'Oro.

--76.83.249.234 18:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Interestingly enough, Vitus Sebastian Barbaro and Vitus Barbaro have both been deleted for failure to provide references. Corvus cornix 22:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and I've just been WP:BOLD and reverted the article to a point before User:Tiki-two and his 65.54.xxx.xxx alter-egos started messing with it. If I've removed anyone's good edits, I apologize profusely, but I think this article needs to be reconsidered in its entirety before it can move forward. Verifiable sources are needed for any further additions or emendations. Deor 00:58, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

• Stop at once! You do not know what you are talking about. I suggest you go to Libro d'Oro as well as Libro d'Oro della Nobilta Italiana For those that don't speak Italian, that is The Golden Book, and The Golden Book of Italian Nobility, and there is also a Golden Book of Venetian Nobiility, and There is also a Golden Book of Venetian Nobility just for the Barbaro family because it is so big and old, abd there is even a newer addition for 2007 too. Stop what you are doing at once. You do not know what you are talking about. The whole article of Barbaro family is coming from the golden book of Nobility often called the Encyclopedia of nobility for that family with all references listed. And I have even personally fact checked what is written in the book to validate it's authenticity, Corvix is wrong and unjustidied.

• Vitus Barbaro was deleted because relevant infoewas included into the Barbaro family. There was no need for a seperate article.

• The whole article is sourced as it appears in the Golden Book. vandalism by Corvix must be reverted. He is deleting without being informed.

Prove it. BTW, I didn't delete anything in this page. Corvus cornix 02:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, now I have, since I reverted the hoaxer's revandalism of this page. Corvus cornix 02:07, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The same user that is meddling with the Barbaro Family page is also relatedly creating a page on something he's calling the Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent. I have found numerous inconsistencies with that article which he attempted to explain away citing unnamed sources, or sources only he claims to have access to. He has edited my personal comments on the discussion page of that article in what appears to me to be an attempt to cover his mistakes. In the discussion page of that article he has referenced pugilism, Amelia Earhart, the Wright Brothers, and a letter by Daniel Russell to a Bro. Chase, a letter which is also cited in his article on the alleged Skull and Crescent Order as being one of their prized artifacts. The citing of this letter was the final straw for me. I was willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but when I found that letter quite amazingly and coincidentally while researching Theta Nu Epsilon on ebay, it became clear that the article on the Sacred Order of the Skull and Crescent was founded mainly, if not wholly, on this individual's fantasies. That letter can still be found on ebay by putting 200101453405, the item number into the ebay search. When I casually conronted the author of the Sacred Order of the Skull and Crescent wikipedia article with this, he initially presented a fantastic notion that perhaps the SOSC members were engaging in the ruse of selling their sacred artifacts to themselves in order to make them look worthless. When I gave the ebay item number, then he quite suddenly and conveniently recalled that oh yes, he just remembered that in his unavailable source it says they reprinted copies of this letter for their members and that this must be one of those ultra rare reprints. The buyer (obviously the author of the Skull and Crescent article) left positive feedback for it. Any dullard can tell an original hand written letter from a copy, if it were a copy negative feedback would have been left. Then upon looking into the publicly available links to items this same person purchased on the online auction site, I found many other fraternity related items as well as Amelia Erhart, Wright Brothers, and pugilism posters! Now I find the author's wikipedia alias is Tiki-Two. Well, that name is almost exactly what the ebay user who purchased this masonic letter uses!

I do not know what his motives are, but it seems he (perhaps in conjunction with associates) are building a hoax on wikipedia, possibly as members of a fraternity. It is possible that he is building a collection of items that he intends to present and cite in articles as important artifacts of secret societies. As a relative outsider to wikipedia, I don't know what course to take, and really don't have the time to find out. I mainly enjoy reading wikipedia articles, not engaging in what to me is vain online argumentation. I fully expect this individual to delite this post, but hopefully it will get through to someone at wikipedia who knows what to do. Wikipedia should not be used to further some publicity stunt or fraternity hoax.

There is no record anywhere else online of a Vitus Sebastian Barbaro that I can find. There is no record anywhere else online of The Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent either.

This won't be the only place I send the above information. Hyper_individualist@yahoo.com July 5, 19:51 PST

Eveyone just stop! I am Tiki-two, and I am a Barbaro historian and have been buildingup a body of knowledge pertaining to the Barbaro family. Before everyone destroys all vaiid knowledge, please stop removing stuff untill people fully understand. That means both Corvix and Wikipedia. Everyone just chill. let me explaine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.142.114.3 (talk • contribs)

• So now both 4.142.114.3 and 65.54.98.111[1] have claimed to be User:Tiki-two. Exactly how many identities do you have, Tiki, and why don't you log on and sign your edits. Time for WP:ANI and a checkuser, methinks. Deor 03:27, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I would not be surprised if a great many of the IP addresses that have been editing this article are controlled by Tiki-two. But in the absence of any evidence to show this, I will WP:AGF and assume otherwise. Terraxos 03:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Why does everyone panic so easily- and it is so hard to explain with all of these edit conflicts. first, off I made it very clear that I am a Barbaro historian. And it is very clear that the source you questioned about Golden Book is just a misunderstanding Golen Book is the same thing as Libro d'Oro. Please stop destroying that article. How can you refute what even has a page on Wikipedia?

If you feel you need to flag the page untill matters are resolved than do so but don't destro it. this is a misunderstanding- there is nothing bogus going on here. I will ccontue to explain after this post

Semi-protected

Semi-protected to prevent further revert warring. Tiki-two (and related anons), the ball's in your court to produce reliable sources, but given the state of things at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pugalist Club the additional information looks like a blatant hoax. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 03:47, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Is not Libro d'Oro a reliable source- would you also like me to find out the ISBN numbers for all the sources on the Barbaro page- you tell me, what will make all of you guys happy. You said Golden book was bogus, then I clarified that it is the same thing as Libro d'Oro. what will make you happy to fell cinfident that the Barbaro artcle is legit- you tell me.

You go and wipe out the whole thing because of some so called bogus source, I prove that the source is not bogus and you still question it. That make sense to you. you don't even give the the chance to explane that "Tiki-one" and "Tiki-two" are society names relevant to the group like "magog" for bones. This collectoron ebay knows that One for Jr. high Priest and two was for senior high priest. big woop. you can go on ebay right now andfine people with id's as bones and magog ans all sort of S&B stuff.

This guy is into the group like I am, and I'm into it solely because the head is a Barbaro. What is so strange about that?

The guy above said the ball is in my court to provide justification. I can give you every ISBN number to the soutces on that page. but you have to give me th echance to post. I have it in my research records right now, and can do it right now if you give me the chance. This is all a misunderstanding that went wrong.

Listen, every corcern that has been listed above- I can answer and explain, but every time I start there is an edit conflict, or someone else that jumps in, now we have the guy who is supicious from the SOSC article in there too, and some other person from PC jumped in and it's all over the place. And i lost my cool initially becuase of all of this, and maybee it is simply this crappy edit conflict sysrtem that Wikipedia has that is getting everyone testi. I don't even know where to start, but first to say that there is nothing bogus going on with anything that I have done, and lets begin by restoring the great body of knowlege of Barbaro family first, becuse to me, that is more important than any stupid college society anyway. Let me big there first.

I can provide you with every ISBN number for every source listed on the Barbaro page. I can do that immediately as well. If you like the golden book referenced in be spelled out in italian rather than english, it's no problem too, but english is acceptable- and more understandable to the Wikipedia audience. but I can Not provide any ISBN nubers to the sources if you keep reoving it. Please leave it.

OK, I brought the page back up as before. now, please leave so I can look at the sources on that page and check my records. I will have all ISBN's posted shortly- thank you for your concern Tiki-two

Wikipedia formatting and style

Please note several edits ending - 00:50, 5 July 2007 - by IP# 65.54.154.153. I attempted to put this article into a more acceptable Wiki format, but was promptly reverted by (from the info above) the original editor. Be aware that Wikipedia working standards for any article require that all material should be original unless shown as a direct quote and should not be under copyright. The format of the article is not dependent on any source or any sequence borrowed from a source, but should comply with Wikipedia standards. As content is under dispute and the article protected, I will not revert. But I will assert that the current article content and format due not meet minimum Wikipedia style and standards. Once content issues are resolved, I would urge a major cleanup. 65.54.155.36 05:31, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I hereby acknowledge my edits of 5 July 2007 (by IP# 65.54.154.153) as well as the edit above by User:65.54.155.36. When working from a computer I do not own, I am sometimes not able to sign in and so may show up with an MSN IP#. I will be pleased to help on the copy editing of this page once things have settled down. GwenW 20:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Dear editor,

• Please restore the Barbaro family article to it's former status. What has begun as a misunderstanding about Golden Book also being the same thing as Libro D'Oro has resulted in much damage on Wikipdedia. The previous page for Barbaro family had sources that are completely verifiable by ISBN numbers. This isn't right, and this damage was primarily caused by volunteers of Wikipedia that focus on secret college societies, and have it in there mind that there is some hoax going on here. A great shame, indeed. So much knowledge has been lost on this Barbaro page. Also one of Fenwick High School's in Oak Park's most illustious Alumni have also been removed from that page's "Noted Alumni" list. He does not deserve that. I commend Wikipedia in their desire to stop bogus knowledge, but sometimes it goes too far with more damage than good.

Corvus has destroyed this page. Look at all of these inaccuracies because of what he has done:

• The family is called "The Eternal Family" not eternal that has been destroyed.

• The family has two major divisions, one considered royal and one not, and one branch now extinct. Where is any of that referenced now.

• Where is the silk branch

• Where are the famous nicknames

• Where are the important contributions to history.

• Where is the Order of the Dragon

• Where is Villa Barbaro- arguably there most important and influential piece of architecture in Western civilization.etc.etc.etc.

I am just so disgusted with all of this. This article was butchered by someone that does not know the first thing about anything that he destroyed. The article as it was before he got there was PERFECT and ACCURATE as inspired from the encyclopedia of nobility with all sources listed and all ISBN numbers attainable. Just absolutely disgusting what has happened, and Vitus Barbaro that is a very private man, does not deserve to be discredited. Corvus could of contacted Fenwick very easily by sending an email to his High School's Alumni director that would have verified everything as true and accurate. Everything that Corvus has done in relation to this and other related articles was uncalled for, unchecked, and based on his ignorance that he did not understand that Golden Book is the same thing as Libro d'Oro. and you can white wash all of this over, but this nonsense began from panic, poor communication, his conspiracy mindset, and Wikipedia's poor edit conflict format when trying to post explanations. I can not express how disgusted I am with all of this. It is just outrageous. Your team out there believe that the answer to all knowledge is a google search away- if being a true historian was only so simple.

Marchesi of San Giorgio in Wikiepedia that uses the source "unpublished research papers" is perfectly acceptable, but The Golden Book that Wikipedia even has an article on is completely suspect. Just outrageous!

So much damage has occured with The Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent as well, after everyone got into a panic over that site. I tried to explain to the fellow that wanted to post pictures from EBAY onto the SOSC page, that he should first give me a chance to look into it before doing so, becuase he labled all the ebay info right away for people to be able to do that. I removed that info of his statement for protection from people wanting to post, so I could check both sources first, my Debris source and the Ebay site. I had to check the Debris source because it is not like I have the letter sitting in front of my face 24/7. When I checked ebay, it was the letter, but in comparison to the letter in the Debris it was without question different. The Debris letter shows lined paper, two signatures, yellow paper not white, and what is clearly a more stronger darker printed image at the top. Without any doubt that letter was a 1992 copy which was also verified when I read portions about the exhibition again, like I have every detail about the exhibition memorized and it is so strange for me to go back and refresh my knowledge. When knowledge was verified, I replaced everything the gentleman wrote and then some and cited the article with the new ebay info, the proper way to go about it. I also removed some things the man said that may have pointed to forceablely to who the head was, I wanted to also look into that before naming him- shoot me for being cautious and responsible. Moreover, no where on the ebay's listing does it ever say it was a genuine antique letter vs. a replica- and it sold for $9.99. I think true antique collectors know real things from copies and bid accordingly. Any true antique would have gone for higher. Then everyone got into a stink about Tiki-two and Tiki-one, but , Tiki, which is a mystical god (like that would be unappropriate for this group that focuses on mysticism) was used like Bones using Magog-know one asked that. One was for junior high priest and two was for senior high priest- and that ebay guy that was using it didn't even do it right when I checked. He is labled as Tiki-1 not Tiki-one. Moreover, that 1992 letter and that guy out there intersted in SOSC stuff is great proof of this group's importance and interest by many people. How many people are there on ebay right now that have Bones inspired ID's and collecting similar Bone's memorabilia- but I guess that is a conspiracy. You just think SOSC is some unheard of thing, but not to people in the midwest or Purdue and not to Purdue's current honor society that still uses Skull and Crescent as their name (go ahead and google that point), and not to TNE Alpha that still honors the SOSC group of Purdue at Wesleyan in their records even though the two groups don't even like each other (go ahead and check TNE page and the official website for chpater list #29- Purdue split -off of Skull and Cresent). So what we also end up with in all of this panic has also destroyed the article of the Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent which was existing perfectly fine with a constructive and healthy talk page based on an article that was perfectly sourced. Then people say what does The Golden Book have to do with secret societies- well if you checked, you would see that Vitus has his school's: Fenwick, Purdue etc, his clubs like SOSC all listed in it - a very relevant source I would say. It even says he was Senior class vice-pres in High School, Chairman of the Newpaper (Wick). Go ahead and go into Fenwick's webpage and find The alumni director Debbie Thompson and email her say, "I understand that there was a 1991 student of Fenwick that is now listed in the encylopedia of nobility as being an alumni- At Fenwick he was called Vito Albergo, but since he has been invested with his noble and royal names of Barbaro and Grand Prince. It says here that this Barbaro fellow was senior class vice -pres and is believe he went on to Purdue as well- can this be verified" You will get a big fat yes! Because eveything on both Fenwick, Barbaro family, and The Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent was 100% accurrate with all sources give.

If Wikipedia has any honor it will return what was valid and true and took a lot of hardwork to create, research, fact check, and source.

• Sir, this is just pathetic. Why can't you just admit to having been caught in some sort of hoax? You are going to such great lengths here to try and make excuses while it is clear to all wikipedia veterans that you are simply a hoaxer. The letter you are referencing discredits you, which is why you bastardized the item number to a pair of lady's shoes. Come on Tiki-1 of Ebay, Tiki-Two of wikipedia. We see you. You have been utterly exposed.--76.83.249.234 08:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I have changed nothing- I am the one that put the source on the site for people to check for themselves. What the hell are you talking about- and what control do I have over Ebay to change anything. You are the one that is trying to gloss over that you did not fact check that the Golden Book is the same thing as Libro d'Oro

You can try all you want ,Corvus, by hiding out by not posting your ID, because you know you made a mistake, you began to edit before checking things because all of you secret society guys think eveything is s hoax. And I guess all that info on Barbaro was a hoax too, right- just like Palazzo Barbaro Curtis that was once written and now is gone; Umm, why don't you google that and tell me if the info that is now removed doesn't pop up as valid, as well as eveything else I told you to do. Please, you will go out of your way to cover up an gloss over the most obvious thing that started this all- and nothing more- you did not fact check Golden Book. And say what ever you want- it is listed right up there at the top of this page for all to see, unless you try to edit it out, and I quote, "There are no such books- according to google" which made you go off on an editing spree with anthing that had that source it. That is the truth!

---

PLEASE STOP BARBARO HOAX!

Dear Wikipedia, I tried to blank the page previously and confirmed that there is an official Barbaro hoax going on. I don't know why it was reverted, but please read the previous page. Thank you very much

There is something very strange going on here that might be coming either from a Fenwick student or someone close to the family, but I am confirming that Vitus Sebastian Barbaro was never involved in any organization known as "The Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent" or the "Pugalist Club".

I am getting something that says new messages, but I don't know what this means exactly- I am not very familiar with Wikipedia, but the Barbaro family has been notified of this hoax and the family is confirming that Mr. Barbaro is not involved with and secret clubs or fraternities. Please remove any of this. Please contact Fenwick high school as well,I will be notifing them about this hoax. Someone please repond to advise me!

• New messages means than someone put something on your talk page. See the upper right-hand corner of the page? That's how you get there. Or, you could just click on the link that pops up when you get new messages. Also, please sign what you say, suing four tildes, so we know you said it. Gscshoyru 12:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Barbaro is the legitimate titled name holder as expressed previously on the Barbaro page, but Vitus Sebastian Barbaro has never been involved in any secret society. Please clarify this. I think someone is having fun with his title of Grand Prince of Transylvania and trying to make look like Dracula. Mr. Barbaro is a gentleman and has never been involved in any questionable groups. I was notified that the family was also linked to a UFO group as well. These are all lies. Please correct Barbaro family. They are an ancient and honorable family. Thank you

Thank you for responding, I don't know what is going on, but I work for Vitus Barbaro, and we were notified about some hoax going on with Wikipedia. I am new to this. I don't know how to sign, but I will use "BFR" to mean Barbaro family representative. I have just finished to contact Fenwick about this problem so the school is completely aware as well. We don't know where this is coming from,. But we think maybe a Fenwick student or possiblty a relative of Vitus who is angry that he is the sole recipient of all of the family's titles, maybee even a disgrunteled employee that works with me. I was sent to help Wikipedia clarify any questions you may have about validity, I will stay on line to answer, thank you "BFR"

Will someone please respond again about this issue "BFR"

Thank you Gwscshoyru for informing me that I should post my concern here and Wikipedia will take it from there. Like I said, I really don't know what is going on, if this is a Fenwick prank or someone working here, I still have to confront my employees about this, I know there is jelousy because he bears all of those titles, and they don't. Maybe they were trying to sabatoge his image. I really don't know, but for the record, let me just clarify this, Mr. Vitus Barbaro has never been involved in any cult or UFO group. The only fraternity he was involved with was Phi Kappa Phi, which is an honors club for good grades. When I looked at the Barbaro family page last week, that had all of the information about the family members and different branches, the Albergo and San Giorgio etc. That page was completely correct. He is titled with a chinese title and the transylvanian title, he is a car designer, just like it said. That was all 100% on, and all of that was all true. All those historical points and details came from the official family record up till 20O7 and the sources on the bottom of the article are the official sources given in the public record, titled the "Encyclopedia of Nobility", that can be purchased publically as a published book by Alvise Zorzi who is the historian/author who formulates and writes this Encyclopedia of Nobility, and he is the single most respected authority on the topic in the world, what he compiles is checked and becomes theofficial standard. It is published by the Committee for the Publication of the Source Material on the History of Venice in Venice, Italy and the info on that page was derived from the latest published edition of 2007.

Also, Vitus did just recently update his alumni record with Fenwick, that why I also think a prank may be coming from there as well. He was also added recently to Fenwick's page as well that was also accurate. My gut feeling is this was a stupid prank by some fool to try to make him look satanic. my suggestion would be to just return things back to the way they previously were- they were accurate and more informative before, but I leave it up to your good judgement from this point forward. Thank you very much "BFR"

---

Please Contact Fenwick High School to Verify that Previous Information for Barbaro family was Accurate

Dear Wikipedia,

Fenwick High School, where Mr. Barbaro attended, has been notified about the hoax that has unfortunately destroyed valuable information about the Barbaro family that would have been useful to all searching Wikipedia. Please contact Fenwick Alumni director Debbie Thompson via email to verify previous knowledge that existed before the hoaxer arrived (dthompson@fenwickfriars.com). Thank you

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.97.195 (talk • contribs) Corvus cornix 17:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

One wonders why an alumni director would know the history of an obscure family from Italy. Corvus cornix 17:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

• Now we have hoaxes within hoaxes and an ever-widening network of same being posted by the same person ("Tiki-Two") both in articles and within their discussion pages. Tiki-Two is a wikipedia polluter and his IPs should be banned.--76.83.249.234 20:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

We are posting on both sites because related damage was also done to Fenwick as well. thank you

I'm getting really tired of dealing with this, but I'd like to ask you, How do you account for the fact that the Wikipedia user who is responsible for "the hoax that has unfortunately destroyed valuable information about the Barbaro family" is exactly the same user who supplied all that "valuable information about the Barbaro family" in the first place? And since you seem to be close to Mr. Vitus Barbaro, perhaps you could supply some verifiable sources to establish his existence, and if he indeed exists, to establish his being notable in any way at all. Deor 18:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

We are sorry that all of this happened, and I truely appoligize for this hoaxer, the very hoaxer that did this is the one that notified the family about the hoax, as a cover up for his wrong doing, and he has since come clean. What he did was honorable at first, he found the Barbaro page flagged and in need of expansion, and used the appropriate source to expand it with. If you go back to 4;30 6 July 2007 Tiki-two, that page is accurate as derived from info found in the the encyclopedia of nobility and sourced as such. Then he went to Fenwick's page, that was also in need of expansion, and expanded it properly too becuase he knows the school personally, and yes the info before the hoax is accuarte and well sourced- he did actually go look for proper sources. So Ironically, the very person that did this damage is the same person that should also be commended for a job well done, those were two great pages that were accurate with substantial knowledge present. But I don't know what to tell you after that, his buddies used the very knowledge that they compiled, which was accurate, and then just took a left turn as a joke that went to far by building from that true knowledge to create a phoney cult society and were basing purchases that Mr. Barbaro made on Ebay as evidence to support this phony society, Mr, Barbaro likes to collect antiques, and Purdue memorabilia, He also studied philosophy at the University of Illinois (so he also collects philosophical antiques like that letter) he also worked for the Art Institute of Chicago as a buyer before going on to be a top car designer- you don't here muh about him because usually with Ferrri, the design house of Pininfarina get all the credit and Mr. Barbaro has remained under the radar, but Vitus is not that old, actually he goes by V.V., and maybee in the future he may start to become more highly visible, but those that know of him regard him very highly, he is multi-talented. And that is what has happened- there are two things,the barbarfamily page and the Fenwick page are accurate. I went back a checked,for example the architect that now needs citing, was perfectly cited well. Go on line and seaech that source and it will have the architect in talking about his work in Notre Dame. so Fenwick and Barbaro family were genuinely good articles for wikipedia. And the Barbaro family now on Wikipedia is way off, there is an Albergo and San giorgio division- everyting as it was saiid before wa true and sourced properly. Now, I need your help, I don't know what to do to prove to you V.V. is real. you can contact Fenwick , that is one way, I can mail you a copy of his drivers liscense, that is another way. I can mail you his design work with Ferrari. All of the living Barbaro's are also notable to bring the family to the present they are called "The Eternal Family" as mentioned and listing those members in the way thearticle did was very relevent. I can also mail you his coat of arms, or letterhead.I don't know what else to tell you. Please advise-I ned your help.

• You may need psychiatric help which is beyond wikipedia's purview. If you are planning on fobbing off items you bought on ebay as secret society and black nobility related items, I suggest you brush up on your hoaxing skills. Fraud won't work for you as a hobby or as a criminal enterprise. You will get caught, especially if you claim to be a noble named VV Barbaro. Tiki-1 is the ebay name of the hoaxer. Tiki-two is the wikipedia name. The IPs he uses usually begin with 65, and include 4.142.114.3 and 65.54.98.111. Wikipedia hoaxing is a nuisance, however falsifying provenance is illegal, and masquerading as nobility for fun and profit is as well. Those two fraudulent possibilities regarding this hoax are the only things that make plausible sense regarding this hoaxer, either that or it's just a teenager (or frat member with similar mentality) pulling a prank or a mentally disturbed person doing this. But the existence of the ebay purchases related to the hoaxer's posts suggests the aforementioned attempt at building a fraud base for a fake identity and falsified provenance. You have been warned Tiki-1/Tiki-Two/IP 4.142.114.3 and 65.54.98.111.

Hyper_individualist@yahoo.com --76.83.249.234 20:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

• • Additionally, what blatant absurdity it is to cite privacy concerns related to ebay elsewhere within discussion pages when it is YOU who continue to blow it by saying the Tiki-1 account belongs to him and going on to give so much more information about this alleged person who more than likely doesn't actually exist outside of your mind, such as it is. This is a sad case. If he were real and you were concerned about his ebay privacy, then you wouldn't have exposed it this way! HOAX HOAX HOAX! Hoaxes within hoaxes, lies within lies expanding ever outward! A huge bundle of nonsense that seeks to suck in everything it can like a black hole! It's hilarious in a twisted cretinous sort of way. I'm sorry, but I just couldn't hold at least that small measure of amused exasperation back. This will be a thorn in wikipedia editors' sides for a long time without an IP purge.

hyper_individualist@yahoo.com--76.83.249.234 21:32, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Individualist, I understnad your anger, and rightfully so, but the situation is under control, you are right, it is the product of a stupid punk, and he is being delt with. It will not happen again. We are very sorry for any distress the situation has called, but it is truely under control by Mr. Dunning from Wikipedia- I refer you to the Fenwick High School Talk Page in Oak Park for validation. You do not need to respond, it will be taken care of. Please have a good day sir.

Let's put in what is known to be true.

I don't want to be the mediator here, and I don't know a huge amount about the Barbaro family, but I do know that the first paragraph of this version of the page is true [2] and completely uncontraversial. So can be re-instated quite safely. Giano 10:29, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Taking your word for it, I reintroduced that section and wikified it a bit. Do you have any opinion on the remainder of what is currently on the page? It looks okay, but it never hurts to have an extra eye on it from someone with a measure of familiarity with the subject. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:05, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

I would have thought, what is there now, would easy enough to check out. The Barbaro are an old, established and well recorded Venetian family, of the reinstated paragraph, the only thing I would like to see cited to a reference is the connections to the House of Grimaldi, I would have though this was more likely to be through a Genoese branch of the family. Venice's Golden book (Il Libro d'Oro) dates from about (I think) about 1320, so that should be mentioned as the article does insinuate (at least to me) that it is before this time that they changed their name. So all the people listed under the section "EARLY BARBARO PATRICIANS" can't have had that name if the they did not change their name until they were listed in the book - so either my date is wrong, or the information is wrong. I suspect it is the latter. This whole page has a grounding of truth, but I did not know, as claimed above, that Venice was still publishing its own Libro d'oro I though they were now included collectively in the Il Libro d'Oro della Nobiltà Italiana

Regarding the article phrases such as this:

• "The Barbaro mystique is that they are the only family without a beginning and without an end, The Eternal Family" are plainly rubbish and have no place on Wikipedia.
• "The current legitimate holder of the Albergo branch's titled names is Vitus Sebastian Barbaro (born on July 27, 1973). His father is Sebastiano (born on July 18, 1935). His mother is Baronessa Grazia Talarico di Capace (born on July 2, 1946)." cannot be correct unless his father is dead which the article does not claim, until that sad day the son can only be "nobile di Albergo branch's titled names"
• "The Crown of a Grand Prince [Grand Prince is a very rare title that is about equal in rank to a King" - complete rubbish. Very rare it is true but King no.
• "In the United States, the Barbaro legacy is most apparent in the design of the U.S. Capital Building. The original design by William Thornton was directly inspired by Villa Barbaro." Here is Villa Barbaro [3] I think people can draw their own conclusions as to the amount of inspiration it provided.
• "The building was inspirational not only for it's aesthetic form, but also for the character of the family it represented" No, I don't think so. This is all beginning to sound horribly like an Italian version of the Arbuthnots.
• "Clearly, The Eternal Family's legacy will always be engrained in America, in Europe, in Western Civilization, and in the world." Again no.
• "Vitus traditionally goes by V.V. Barbaro, Vitus Barbaro or Vitus Sebastian Barbaro after he was invested with the right to use the family's titled names. " Invested by whom exactly - I would love to know the answer to that - the present Holy Roman Emperor perhaps?
• "His Illustrious Highness The Princely Count Vitus Sebastian Barbaro, Patrician of Venice of The Grand Princes of Transylvania and The Venetian Barons" A patrician of Venice would not include the lower title Venetian barons after after his name. In fact it is doubtful a Patrician of venice would use any other title - we are talking about a cast and class of merchant-aristocracy that generally looked down on titles as vulgar, basically telling Napoleon where to stuff them. Even today they are very proud of ther Venetian heritage, almost to the exclusion of all other titles. I think young Vitus is getting a little carried away here, and may have a problem wanting to be called "Illustrious Highness" on the fondamenti of Venezzia.

In short yes the Barbaro existed, yes they were powerful, and like all old aristocratic families are connected to influential families and have numerous cadet branches. However, I can think of dozens of more influential Italian families than the Barbaro. This reads to me like a Barbaro across the Atlantic looking for some famous titled ancestors. In one of the most recent social history book of Venice "Venice" by Francesco da Mosto - the Barbaro do not have one listing among the references to the ancient powerful of Venice. So let's not get carried away with this family's fame and influence. When this page is unprotected I suggest any fact not well known is tagged as such and then deleted after a short interval. Giano 14:40, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

It does say that "Sebastiano was an artist, art restorer, and international art dealer in Italy, France, and the United States. He specialized in dealing with mid-century modernists such as Enrico Donati, Lucien Ruolle, and artists of the Peggy Guggenheim circle.". So I presume that the wording indicates that Sebastiano is no longer alive? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 16:21, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

---

An Educated Response to Correcting the Barbaro Family Page

• I'm curious, how does a person that first claims that they don't know that much about this family, all of a sudden has all of the answers. You really are not well informed. They are specifically called "The Eternal Family" as well as having gone from from their previous motto "Circlo Moro" "ring of the moore" to the eternal ring of blood of the Barbaro family. That is why Romania is so important to them which is clearly discussed in Vittorio Spretti's work which was mentioned within the text. Spretti, also specifically made the statement about their high character alone over any other family. It is written in Spretti's work. I know for a fact, and those discussions of Spretti were also mentioned in the other sources given, so there was need to source Spretti as well.

• Your theory about "nobile di Albergo" is wrong. I don't even think you know what nobile is. It is a specific title given to a Venetian noble when Venice was briefly under Austrian control. Unlike other titles that were specific to a fuedal estate, Nobile granted power within a whole general region. And Vitus can easily be designated as the head in accordance with Venetian noble custom.

• I think you are confused as to Italian noble customs and designations. Giano 17:45, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Grand Prince being a title "about equal in rank to a king" is absolutely true. Some say that it falls between King and Grand Duke, others say it is more like a king. And for the Habsburgs and Russian Royalty, it was definetly defined as King.

• It is not about equal rank with a King, it is a bestowed title, a Grand Prince no matter how grand is a vasaal a King is not. Giano 17:47, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• • (Giano is wrong!) This guy is way off base, even the Emperors of Hapsburg were called Grand Princes of Transylvania too. This guy doesn't even understand what a cadet branch is. It's a branch to establish "highness". Do you know what that means and why it is important? It was explained in the previous version of this page. It allowed the Barbaro family to marry into ruling houses of Europe. You do know that there is a difference between royalty and nobility- don't you? Will someone please bring the proper page back so people can get it?F550 06:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• A cadet branch is a minor branch of a major family. It is nothing at all to do with highness. Please stop adding rubbish to Wikipedia. Giano 08:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Your percieved opinion about the Capital Building only mildly being derived from Villa Barbaro is also wrong. It is a fact to be fully derived. Before Villa Barbaro was made, there was no other villa like it in the wold- it was ground breaking and revolutionary for renaissance architecture. It was the direct source for many buildings including Buckingham Palace. Thomas Jefferon was a friend of the Barbaro family. He specifically got Palladio's book called the "4 Books of Architecture" from the Barbaro family and when Jefferson, who was also an architect, came back to the U.S.after staying with the Barbaros in Italy at their villa, he specifically designed his own home after Palladio's Rotunda and specifically accepted the U S Capital submission based on the "Noble" character of the Barbaro family. In Jefferson's own words.

Jeferson referred to 4 books as his bible, and had known of them for years before he had even heard of the Barbaro. Giano 17:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• • (Giano is wrong!)Excuse me, who do you think was the patron of Palladio. It was the Barbaro family, and how do you think Jefferson was even able to get a copy of the book at that time, it's not like you can just walk into your local book store, copies were rare, he got it from the Barbaro family, and if he is calling it "His Bible", doesn't that also say somthing about the importance of the Barbaro connection?F550 06:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Copies of that book were far from where. There was also Campbell's Vitruvius Brittanicus which inspired architects in Aneica reproducing many plans inspired by Palladio and othersGiano 08:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• If the page was intact the way it should be, it was clarified that after 1933 noble/royal families own their titled names. The investitute they are referring to is when Vitus became the official head of the family and legally took on the right to the family's names which no one else in that family has right to. It was made very clear in the article.

No it is not, it says he was invested, there ws ni investiture for the simple reason there was no monarch to invest him with these titles. Giano 17:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• Your theory about having a branch from Genoa is also bogus, no such thing. Your theory about Venetians having a cadet branch is also bogus, no such thing. Zorzi ,the expert, makes that very clear in the sources listed. This Barbaro branch was a cadet branch to the Imperial house as perfectly explained in detail on the original page.

• I merely question the Genoese Grimaldi family marrying into the Venetian nobility, I do not say it did not happen, I merely ask for a reference. Giano 17:50, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• • (Giano is wrong!) Did this Giano guy even read the proper page we are talking about. The Barbaro connection to the Grimaldi is through their "Albergo". Do you even know what an Albergo is? Please go back to the original page before all of this hoax rubbish started and get educated! The original page even had a link to the House of Grimaldi so you can learn more about what an Albergo is, did you go there and read it. The Grimaldi were one of 28. Here, go to the link and read House of Grimaldi. Will someone out there please get this page back to where it was!F550 06:20, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Again, I merely wasnt a reference for this, I have myself written a few Wikipedia pages on the Grimaldi this one for instance. So I am aware of that family's origins. I did not say there was a branch frm Genoa - I asked if there was such a branch as this would make the connection more likely Giano 09:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• "Illustrious" is not there to be fancy. It is the specific "style" for a princely count- used universally for all princely counts. And Styles like (His Royal Highness etc.) are manditory to establish royal rank. There are families like Prince Borghese who are using Prince and are not royal, they are only nobles, and when Princess Diana had her style of HRH removed by the queen after her divorce was a big deal to those that know these things. It meant that she was no longer considered royal, she technically was only a noble princess there after.

• The removal of Diana, Princess of Wales' HRH was probably ilegal as there is no provision in British law for a non-royal princess, however. It is not used universlly, the 1st Duke of Marlborough was a Holy Roman Prince his family do not use the title. Neither do most other descendents of such people. Giano 17:53, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• • (Giano is wrong!) Oh boy, let me clue you in, Lady Di's removal of her HRH was done by Queen Elizabeth Herself-I think that was perfectly legally done. Also Every true royal must have a style of highness as established after the Congess of Vienna. I believe that was also talked about in the previous version. His Imperial Highness His Royal Highness, His Serene Highness, His Illustrious Highness. These are all indicators of royal princes. The first for an emperor, than king, than principality(like Monaco), etc. The previous article also explained why the Barbaro branch of the Albergo line had to have such a unique formulation as well with the whole Gefurster Graff bit. This is stupid to have this version of the Barbaro family. The other version explaind it all.F550 06:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• There is still much debate in English legal circles as the legality of that act (Elizabeth II is subject to the law too) as there is also question as to the legality of denying HRH to the Duchess of WIndsor. Giano 09:01, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• • I'm sorry Ganio you are way off base and completely wrong. When Edward abdicated, he lost all his privleges and even the right to reside in England and remained in France there after. There is no debate on that topic and conversations about the Duke of Windsor are not even relevant anymore. We all need to move on to the task at hand, restoring this page the way it should be for geneologists and others.F550 15:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Morover, Zorzi the single most authority on Venietian nobility/royaly, as well as Basehart whose sources were listed in that article specifially call them "the Imensly Noble" and the "Most Illustrious family's of Venice". They controled the silk industry ;they are the most culturally influential family in the world by any all experts opinion.

I further encourage you to google "Barbaro San Vidal" and you will find that the majority of the whole Warburg and Courtauld Institute has devoted all of their work on this family alone. There is a listing right now just to study Daniele Barbaro's last will and testiment as a piece of 16th C. philosophy . It is number LXV by Bruce Boucher.

Then there is a second study of the "Divine Love and Veronese's Frescoes at the Villa Barbaro" by Jackson Reist of the same institute that made up the majority of the art bulletin in vol. 67. no. 4 Dec. 1985.

In short, what has occured to the Barbaro family page on Wikipedia and Vitus Barbaro being removed from Fenwick's noted alumni is outrageous. Vitus has always been considered America's prince. He is the only known royal born and raised in America, and has done much to help other Americans. I emailed the school and he is even in the works of talking to the students about aerospace car design and has even offerened to bring exotic cars over for display for the students to learn from as soon as the new construction of the school's expansion is completed. He is highly, highly regarded by anyone that knows him, and everyone is falling into the trap that the hoaxer wanted of you- to try to discredit a great and honrable family. There should be no question that the Barbaro family page and the Fenwick page be brought back to the way they were and immediate removal of those two stupid secret societies that were nothing more than a stupid prank that is now hurting innocent people and everyone's availability to the most fullest and accurate knowledge. Thank you. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.54.155.41 (talk • contribs).

• "Vitus has always been considered America's prince. He is the only known royal born and raised in America" - Complete rubbish he is not Royal and he is not a prince, and Prince Vitus had better get used to it - how are you suggesting he is known Principe di X, where is the X? - that should be easily checkable. Giano 17:56, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• I still remain astounded that the person considered "America's prince" gets not even a single Google hit, Google Books hit, or Google news hit (archives included). Obviously we Americans don't threat our reigning monarchy nearly so well as most other countries. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:25, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• .........and as for the external link leading to this [4] to belive that one would have to be as daft as those who pay a fortune for a copy of that coat of arms - it is rubbish with a capital R. Those are not princely arms in Italy or anywhere else for that matter. Incidentally that site says the family are of Sicilian origin - Oh just beam me up! Giano 18:15, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• PS any Barbaro out there considering buying that "crest" should be aware that a "crest" is just the emblem on top of a coat of arms not the whole thing as that site suggests. Giano 18:24, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• First off, by the expression "America's Prince" I don't literally mean that he is a Prince ruling over America. What I mean is he is someone royal born in America. He is also one of the most grounded and hard working people you will meet, so you should not also assume that wants special privelege either. He is an American of noble/and royal heritage lets not read into that anymore than needs to.

• Those sites of arms are complete bull- your right. And if the article was intact it also explains why those sites have to do that because true nobility own their titled name and arms as property. Those sites have to have to create bogus arms to not get in trouble. Sicily is bull too- there has never been a branch from sicily of Barbaros. They are a Venetian family and if the article was in tact it also says that the Albergo branch was a cadet line of the Habsburg House through their Grand Principality of Transylvania.

• All of this was already explained in the full article. What is all of this talk of Principe di X. If the article was in tact it explained it all. Gefursteter Graf, Grand Prince of Transylvania, Princely Count to the house of Habsburg. The meaning of Princely count. Everything.

• All of those comments that were added were way off base too. 4 books of architecture was a book writen by Palladio on architectural design called "Quatrro Libri" in Italian. No where in the article did it ever say marring into Grimaldi family, it said connection through an "Albergo". Go back and read it. Also, the confusion over the Barbaro family that has occurred becasue of this hoax is not about this information. It is about some's nonsense secret society that was made up and then got attached to this becasue they were saying Vitus was the head of this secret society, which he is not. That is why we are here today. You want me to address all of these issues ,that are not even issues, if the article was intact. You want me to address about marriage of Grimaldi family, and vassal kings, and investiture that was completely answered perfectly in the original article. This is silly. It explains what a cadet branch is, it explains what an "Albergo" is, it explains about being "invested" with title names. The article explained it all!

:::*Actually Palladio's 4 volumes were called "I Quattro Libri dell'Architettura" in Italian. Giano 09:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC) We are now in a conversation that has absolutely no benifit. Why should we be questioning if the Barbaro family was married to the Grimaldi. The simple and only answer without any question is NO. This isn't even an issue that needs to be discussed, Neither is Principe di X, Etc. Return the article the way it was before the jerk hoaxer brought all of this on and we are done. All the answers you need are already answered. Why should anyone be in a discussion of Principe di X. When there is no Principe di X in the Barbaro family or anywhere in the article or anywhere else in the world.

• We are questioning these things because you claimed them without references in an article. Giano 09:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Look at all of those names of members listed at the bottom page now. Before, everyone of those people had information about them with dates. Now, that is all gone. Where is the explanation about the different branches, where is the explanation about Villa Barbaro, where is the explanation about the 2 different Palazzos, Where is the discussion about the symbols on Villa Barbaro, Where is the discussion of the Chinese title, Where is the discussion....This is stupid guys, we understand what has happend with the hoaxer now. We just have bring back up the page as it was, and we are done. We are arguing in circles now over things that don't need to be discussed like "if the Barbaro family married Grimaldis".

• Palazzo's? I think you will find the Italian plural is Palazzi - yest there were two different palazzi - I wrote a page here two years ago concerning one of them. Giano 09:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Where is the explanation about silk production, where is the explantion of the cures with Louis Pasteur, where is the "Farfalla di Barbaro" that is still used today, where is the discussion of Prince Wei long, where is the discussion of everything that was important. The article was perfect and complete before!

My God, not even Alvise who was elected doge is even on the page- how much more venetian can you get. And what about even current Barbaro family members like the von Zimmermanns that even have their own individual page on Wikipedia but are not mentiond in the Barbaro family- or Sebastiano's link to the Guggenhein circle that is profoundly important to the history of art and it's connection to Jackson Pollock and putting the American modern art scene on the map, and Vitus's work with Ferrari on the Enzo the 4th greatest ranked car in the history of automibles. And what about Vitus's mother who is a descendant of Italy's first king and conquer of Rome- I would say that is pretty important to Barbaro history because it is pretty important World history!

• Perhaps you should just write a page on Prince Vitus' mother instead? <that is a joke> Giano 09:41, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Where is the Barbaro contribution to changing the abuses of the church, where is the Barbaro discovery of sexual reproduction by patronage of Fallopio, where is the patronage of Galeleo that results in the telescope as we know it today. Where is everything thats is BARBARO! Everything that this family is known for, everything that this family is famous for- Everything that is BARBARO! Even our Kentucky derby champion horse was named after a foxhound who was named after Daniele Barbaro. That specific foxhound belonged to Bonheur. and when Barbaro the horse got hurt at the preakness. Roy Jackson himself contacted Vitus and even has a letter to prove it addresed as "N.H. Count Vitus Sebastian Barbaro". Everything about this page has been ruined now. It's meaning, it's significance, it's purpose in relation to context. The page was perfect before the jerk hoaxer came along and ruined it for all of us. This is dumb, we just need to return the page before the jerk hoaxer started, and prove that his vandalism got him no where. If we let him get away with this than he won and made all of us look like fools.

Oh, this is classic, I had the opportunity to look at the link, just now, on the bottom of the Barbaro family page that leads to the Barbaro site that has a bogus company that must sells fake crests otherwise the true titled noble family's of the world could sue them for identity theft. The Barbaro arms is the ring of blood, a red annulet on a silver field, as previously expained perfectly before. Could this bogus seller go any more out of his way to protect his back than by using the most exact opposite thing he could find Blus vs. Red; Gold vs. Silver; Lines vs. a Ring. The true Barbaro coat of arms is carved right on top of Villa Barbaro. Go google, Villa Barbaro right now and find a good picture of the front of the building that shows the ring on top of the double headed eagle as perfectly explained in the article as it was before the hoaxer ruined it. Could this current Barbaro page be any more inaccurate?

For those of you having a hard time finding a good picture of the TRUE Barbaro coat of arms do this: do a search online, not through google, just a regular online search, and type in "Malta Barbaro", because as you may remember before the page got ruined, there is a difference in the arms between the "St. Georges" and the "Albergo" line, the St. Georges have a division in their arms because of the mariage to Countess von Zimmerman, Oh I'm sorry, you wouldn't know that because it was removed. Any how, type in Malta Barbaro and the 5th entry on the page should be "Search Malta Maltese Surname Connection". Then find the B's and click Barbaro, and what do you have?: exactly what was written before, but now is all gone. What was written said their was a division in the Maltese arms that had the ring of blood in the upper half and 3 black greyhound heads in the lower half because of the marriage to Countess von Zimmerman. The page even went into greater detail about what a count's coronet looked like and what a marquis' coronet looked like. This picture shows two pearls between strawberry leave, which means it was for the marquis of the line vs. a corronet with 9 pearls which would have been for the count of the line. You could have known this, but the page that once had that imformation is now destroyed and can easily be brought back for the hoaxers damage.

• Regarding the claim that the Villa Barbaro was Thorneton's inspiration for The Capitol building in Washington - these edits fully referenced [5] and [6] seems to answer that. At the moment I think all but the first paragraph of the article needs to be deleted Giano 21:48, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

• • Where do you think things like the Louvre were inspired from as well, but from Palladio too. Don't people get that the world did always exist the way it does now, before buildings like Villa Barbaro, the world just did not design in that way. Those Palladian buildings influence everyone after. Look at the U.S. Capital with it's extending elongated wings- that was first done on Villa Barbaro. Romans didn't really have a building like that either. Villa Barbaro was unique and groundbreaking.F550 06:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh really, first off using a Wikipedia source of edits is hardly a primary source to base historical information on. No one in Wikipedia references an article by referencing another Wikipedia article. It is not done. And if you would have checked the source of "Venetian Villas" by Michelangelo Murano and Paolo Marton, as it once was listed, It is talked about. In the meantime, why don't you do this, go into google and type in 'Metropolitain Museum of Art in New York ". Go into the museum site and on the left in search type in "Barbaro". What comes up? Only two of the some of the greatest Barbaro treasures to be found in the 1# ranked museum in America. 1st, there is "The Glorification of the Barbaro Family" you would have known this before, but too bad it's gone. What does that world class historian write, and I quote, "The Barbaro were among the MOST ILLUSTRIOUS Venetian families". Umm, seems like this world class historian thinks those Barbaros were pretty darn important.Then what is listed below that, Oh my God, it is the Quattro Libre (4 Books), you remeber those, don't you, those books that Jefferson brought back after he was a guest of the Barbaro family in Italy and used ss a guide to design Montecello, something that is written right on the display when you go to the Met to look at it for real. But you don't know that because you are uninformed and would have benifitted from the true article. Moreover, you have zero credibility to this issue already with your nonsense of Principe di x etc. You have already said yourself, and I quote, "I don't know a huge amount about the Barbaro family". Your opinion carries no weight. This was a perfectly good article that a hoaxer has taken everyone on a ride with. When are we going to have perfectly good knowledge restored?

• When you have quite finished your insults and ranting, I suggest you check out who wrote Wikipedia's article on Palladianism which covers the spread and influenves of Palladio's influences and ideals. Incidentally the link I gave above references to an established a well known independently published reference book - not Wikipedia a s you suggest. Giano 08:48, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

WHEN IS THIS PAGE GOING TO RESTORED WITH IT'S FORMER KNOWLEDGE?

Lets talk somemore about important knowledge that has been lost. Remeber the important portrait of Daniele Barbaro about him being painted in the black and white robes of the Dominican Order rather than the red garments of the cardinals of the "old" church and in his hand were the important writing that he did and not a bible or a picture of a saint that would have been typical before. Remember that? Let's take a look shall we: go type in www.portraitgallery.org.uk on a regular online search. This will lead you to the very important royal gallery in London. Then when you get to the page, do a search for "Barbaro". What do you get? Well you get exactly what was written and even more. There is the portrait of Cardinal Daniele in the Black and White garments just as describednad and in is hands are and I quote, "on the table are two volumes of his REKNOWN translation". Then go right below that picture, what do we have, we have more very important stuff, we have the "Grand Canal, Venice" painted by Monet who was able to do his work in Venice because the Barbaro family paid and supported both him and his wife, and I quote, "where he and his wife had lodgings".When will this page be restored to it's former state, it is quite obvious that what was listed before was perfectly good knowledge. The page was perfect and existed without even a single remark on it's talk page because it was 100% perfect. When will the page be corrected?

Well, lets now see what an Ivy League school thinks about Villa Barbaro. Is it really as important as people say? Go do an online search under "Barbaro Columbia University" and then go into the 6th entry listed titled "Columbia University-Universita Ca Foscari" Check that out, Columbia University has a whole summer course to go specifically to Padua and VILLA BARBARO. It is Art History course number S4430. So out of all the places they could go, and out of all the things they could see in Italy, and out of all the beautifull buildings and villas. Where do they take their students to, VILLA BARBARO. Villa Barbaro is the single most influental building that inspired countless buildings across the world. When is this page going to be restored properly?

• Villa Barbaro is an important work by Palladio. Palladio was influenced by the classical temple architecture of the Romans. Palladio designed many buildings all of which were important. Palladio's work inspire the Palladian movement of the late 17th and 18th centuries. Palladianism developed slowly into neoclassicism by incorporating Greek classical influences. The Capitol is neo-classical in design. So has influences of Palladio but to select one villa as inspiring it would be very wrong. Parts of the Villa Barbaro were inspired by Rome's Pantheon, so one could argue that the Pantheon inspired the capitol, that is very plausible, but at Barbaro the pantheon was the inspiration for the chapel out in one of the wings. To say Barbaro was THE influence for the Capitol is plain wrong. Giano

Now lets see what else Columbia University thinks about the Barbaro family. Remember that portion about how a Barbaro family member translated important philosophical works that are now in the special collections of Columbia University. Is that really true? Do an online search for "Ermolao Barbaro Columbia University" and go to the 4th one: Treasures:Columbia Rare Book & Manuscript Libraby. Umm, it's listed as "treasure" that sound pretty valuable and important to me. I wonder what it is? Look at that, it is the actual translation of Aristole from ancient Greek into a modern language by Francesco Barbaro and Ermolao Barbaro. It was also given as a gift by the famous George Plimpton. You are telling me that if these two Barbaros didn't actually take time to learn a dead obscure greek language and used their knowledge to translate what Aristole wrote, the world today would not even know what Aristole written- you mean they saved Aristole for the whole world today- you mean they actually impacted the world that much? YES! When is the Barbaro page going to be restored back to the way it should!

Now lets look into the most remarkable part of the former article.It said the Barbaro branch of the Albergo line went to China and got a silk moth specific to Asia and then they created this rare type of silk moth that had dwarfed wings that was so astonishing, it even made them become Chinese princes. That can't be true, there isn't any rare moth that they specifically made, Right? Even Vitus Barbaro uses a symbol of this called the "Farfalla di Barbaro", Come on. This moth sounds like it is made up? If it exists, show me a picture of it. Fine, go to WWW.Wormspit.com. Now, once there, go into Bombyx mori. Do you rember Bombyx mori, it used to be in the article-but now it's gone. Wow, it even says it is the "China silkmoth" Now, see those picture poping up go down to number 38, pass number 39 which is a grouping of 7, and then go to 54. Oh my god! There it is! Exactly as descibed with its dwarf wings and inability to fly!

WE can go on forever with this. The former Barbaro page was perfect, we now have a page with a completely bogus arms link, and we have all of this proven knowledge gone.

With all do respect, and with your appreciation for safety, I think it is time to bring back the page the way it should be. We all understand what has occured, and the Barbaro page was perfectly fine. There is no justification for this block. All of the information on that page was true and verifiable from sources listed. Please return the page back for others to have access to valuable knowledge about the Barbaro family. It is information about our world history. It is information about all of our history. Thank you.

• • The previous article with all information and sources was also a value research guide with excellent topical direction for the family, renaissance information, and excellent structure, meaning and context. It was genuinely better before. Thank youF550 04:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• • What is also interesting about the Barbaro family is how much of an impact they had on cultural development even after the San Vidal branch became extinct. Specifically how the Curtis family of Boston, which was mentioned in the previous version of this page, took over where the San Vidals left off- they preserved the Barbaro ideals. Try doing a search online for "Gardner Museum Barbaro". The first listing "ISGM Exhibition: Gondola Days" is excellent. It talks about how Henry James wrote on "On the Wings of the Dove" and "The Aspern Papers", two of his most famous works, while living at Palazzo Barbaro as well as the painter Singer Sargent painting some of his most famous works there too. Palazzo Barbaro became the center around which the whole turn-of-the-century art scene revolved. The exhibitions title of "Barbaro Circle" is also very. It references both the ring on the Barbaro arms and the circle of artists. Any way you look at it, dead or alive, past or present, there will forever be a strong Barbaro presence in the world-I guess thats why they are called "The Eternal family".F550 05:27, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

References

I've been following this discussion for a while now, and it looks like the real problem here is verifiability. So, if you'd kindly just list the sources you have that support his article, sans commentary, or indirection, in a short list, I think we could all move forward a lot more effectively. --Haemo 06:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi there. There never was an issue about references. The page always had the best references possible for the Barbaro family already on it. What happened is some jerk hoaxer started saying that Vitus Barbaro was the head of some cult secret society and started a page on that. This jerk caused all of this nonsense on a perfect good Barbaro page. Vitus Barbaro in real life is an aerospace engineer and car designer. He is well known in car designing circles. If you lift the ban I can bring up the page the way it was and you will have all of your references back. Then after that, if you just wipe out this whole discussion on the talk page we are exactly back to where we were before the hoaxer came along. There was nothing on this talk page befoe the hoaxer started because the whole Barbaro family page well well written and expained perfectly in detail. If you lift the ban, I'll pull up the right article as it was and you can see for yourself. Thank you F550 06:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

This wasn't what I asked. What are the "best references possible?" List them below, if you would. --Haemo 06:53, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I will list the best Barbaro sources on the topic:

1. Basehart, Jack; Italian Splendor, Palaces, Castles, and Villas; Rizzoli Press, 1990
2. Cassar Desain, L.A.; Genealogia della Famiglia Testaferrata di Malta; Malta, 1880
3. Bove,Valeria; Veneto Villas; Arsenale Editrice, 1999
4. Duggan, Christopher; A Concise history of Italy; Cambridge University Pres, 1994
5. La Famiglia di Barbaro dell'Albergo di Venezia; (Venice,Italy), 1816
6. Gauci,C.A,; A Guide to Maltese Nobility; Publishers Enterprise Group Ltd., 1992
7. Giles Ash, S,; The Nobility of Malta Publishers Enterprise Group ltd., 1988
8. Gruen, Erich S.; The Last Generation of the Roman Republic; University of California Press, 1995
9. Heather, Peter: The Goths, The People of Europe; Blackwell, 1996
10. Montalta, J.; The Nobles of Malta, 1530-1800; Midsea Books Lts, 1980
11. Muraro, Michelangelo; Venetian Villas; Konemann Press, 1999
12. Nicolson,Harold; The Congress of Vienna, A Study in Allied Unity: 1812-1822; Grove Press, 1946
13. Norwich, John Julius; A History of Venice; Vintage Books Press, 1989
14. The Records of Italian Nobility; Department of Nobility Records, Italian Government; (Rome & Calabria, Italy), 2007
15. Travels of Giosafat Barbaro, Ambassador from Venice to Tanna; 1436
16. Zorzi, Alvise; The Golden Books of Nobility for the House of Barbaro; Commitee for the Publication of Source Material on the History of Venice, (Venice, Italy), 2007
17. Zorzi,Alvise; Venetian Palaces; rizzoli Press, 1989
18. Zorzi,Alvise; A City, A Republic, an Empire: Venice 679-1797; Overlook Press, 1999F550 07:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Can you provide ISBN numbers for numbers 16, 17 , and 19 to facilitate verification -- these also seem to be the most relevant to the family in question --Haemo

• 16) has no ISBN, Zorzi is Listed as Chairman of the Commitee and he is also listed as Venetian nobility himself.

• 17)ISBN 0-8478-1200-6

• 18)ISBN 1-58567-132-0

Er, I meant 15, sorry. But, anyways, now that we've gotten this straightened out, we can start putting this article back together again. Let's focus on the lead -- since you seem to be the resident expert on this topic, could you propose a revised lead, citing references claims when necessary. Other editors can then give their input, and verify the validity of the statements therein. --Haemo 07:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The original article was completely inspired from the Barbaro listing in the encyclopdia of nobility. This lead is perfect. It is the exact same lead that the article had before. I would not change that at all.F550

But, this is one of the sources we can't verify. Surely, if the family is notable, you will be able to source this material to some other book? --Haemo 07:59, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't follow? What source can't you verify? Do you mean the encyclopedia of nobility, Please explainF550 08:04, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Source #16 has no ISBN, and does not come up on any Google Searches. References must be verifiable -- it's impossible to find, or even tell, the nature of such a work. In fact, one would be hard pressed to convince a skeptical editor that it even exists. --Haemo 08:33, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Evolved from the Julii???

This is an issue for WP:FTN. Having started Descent from antiquity, I may assure you that any claim of proved Roman descent is a hoax. See Christian Settipani's "Continuité gentilice et continuité familiale dans les familles sénatoriales romaines a l’époque impériale: mythe et réalité" for some intriguing speculations on the issue. Nathaniel Taylor's review is available here. The Barbaro genealogy was formerly available on sardimpex.com, but the content was deleted for copyright reasons. --Ghirla^-трёп- 13:11, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Will people that dow't know a darn thing about geneology please stay the out of this. You don't know what you are talking about. I am a professional about Italian geneology and I can assure you that there was nothing wrong with the previous page. Will people, like Ghirla, Please focus on something you are actually expert on. Thank you and with all respect.F550 14:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, there was a lot wrong with the previous page, which lacked verifiable sources and was full of uncited material. This page must comply with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Also, your behavior must comply with those policies, including remaining civil and polite towards others and no personal attacks. --Aude (talk) 14:18, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• The page could be completely cited-there is no problem with that. There was No problem with the sources either. F550 14:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• "Could be completely cited" is not good enough. Until it is cited with verifiable reliable sources, the material does not belong in the article. --Aude (talk) 14:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Unprotected and pared down

There seems to be a general consensus based on comments here and at my own talk page that the initial paragraph is decent but the remainder is suspect, so I have pared the article down and (for now) removed protection. Since this topic has been the target of hoaxes (which even the anon IP has acknowledged), I will be actively monitoring it for unsourced (or not strongly-sourced) information and urge other users to do the same. If anyone re-adds unsourced or questionably-sourced information to the point of disruption, the article will be re-protected. In particular, editors should watch for mentions of "Vitus Barbaro", on whom no reliable sources--or indeed any sources at all--have emerged. Sourcing on biographies of living persons is taken extremely seriously on Wikipedia, and claiming to have gotten a letter from some guy or called up a high school teacher is not a reliable source, and even if it's true (a doubtful scenario, let's face it), would constitute original research, which is also forbidden on Wikipedia. So, with all that in mind, let's get to fixing this article! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:30, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• I have been following this too. Starblind is someone that is also not an expert on this topic. The general consensus is being inspired from people like Genio and others that have alot of opinions and zero facts. I have come to the Barbaro page in the past before the hoaxer started spreading rumors about secret societies only recently. I have used those sources and checked those sources and they all check out. I have those sources in my personal collection. Geneology is a complex science. I also know that many people that have gotten involved in this situation are people that focus on secret societies and think that there was something wrong with this page. Nonsense. This family typically gets alot of interest in those goth types that hear "Transylvania" and ring of blood and Eternal family... and then try to use that in all sort of Dracula type things. I can verify that the page was perfectly fine from a true geneologist. Also, Vitus, if you read the article has many names that he uses and can go by including Albergo and others.F550 14:38, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Someone above is saying that the Julii is some sort of hoax. Rubbish, it is 100% true and verifiable. Did you ever read the huge volumed set by Spretti that was previously mentioned in the old page. I have it right in front of me. The first thing that he says on pag 274 when he begins a discussion about that family," Vestusta familglia veneta alla qualeuna antica tradizione attribuisce l'origine dalla <gens Catullia>, consolare romana...onde sfuggire alle persecuzioni diocleziane dell"era dei Martiri (303-311). Translation: This family is derived from the ancient family of Catulus (Catullia in Italian), the family of Roman consuls from the period of Rome's persecultion under Diocletian during the era of Chistian marters of 303-311. Then if you would of seen the article previously on Wikipedia, it went on to explain the adoption of Sextus Julius Caesar into the Catulus family. Everything was explanied perfectly. It gave a link to Gens so people knew what that was too. As an expert, I know 100% without any question, what was on Wikipedia before is what should be returned. From time to time, geneologists will use Wikipedia to inspire our research directions. I have checked in to those sources, they are good. That previous page completely checks out, and was an excellent body of knowledge.F550 15:16, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Now, as a professional geneologist, the way the page should be, is brought back to the way it was, and then information should be cited, which I can do. That is the proper way to do it. So if someone really was concerned about a point, they can then research that source and check for themselves. That is the way to do it professionally. When you go buy a book, and this book has all of this information it it, you are taking that writer's word for it too. That is why books, at the end, have sources in it- so you can check for yourself if you have doubts about what that author has written. And many authors are wrong, not out of malice, but simply because they haven't come accross certain sources or more relevant research. It is an evolving science that builds more and more knowledge over time. No one removes valuable knowledge just because they are not personally informed on it or because they are not familiar with a source. That is the whole point of publishing and publishing with sources and creating good Wikipedia articles. My work takes me all over the world. We have valid sources for geneology that at times come from some obscure goldenbook of a small village that is completely valid to use as a source. There has been many a time that I had to go to places like that to see if a point was valid. As a professional, I don't fully trust one single thing for sure on Wikipedia, not one single article I have ever read on Wikipedia. All of Wikipedia knowledge is suspect, but if is important enough for someone to know for sure, they have the sources listed and can check it out. There are geneology pages on Wikipedia right now that have sources that say from so and so's unpublished research records on file at this university. That is a perfect legit source. As a geneologist, I would then go to that university and check for myself if I needed to. I know the history of this family well, and I know for sure 100% that Baronessa Talarico, and Vitus and Sebastiano and Mr. St. George and Dr. Barbaro are all legit. At one time, in Ortelius, the person who invented the atlas of maps, had the area where Vitus' mother's ancestors came from specifically listed as "Capace" becuse of that family's association with the territory. In geneology there are many paths we take to build up knowledge over time, and what was written on the Wikipedia page before was knowledge fully established by verifiable sources. F550 15:57, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

---

Solution Proposed

Now, the proper thing to do is for me to bring back the original page and source it and look it over, and then I think this matter could be closed. I also think that this talk page should be started from scratch again. However, I would like to leave some of those portions that talk about how to see the Barbaro things at the Met, and the page about silk moths, as well as the Columbia University collection. That should remain on the talk page, but the rest should go, it will only cause confussion. Then, I think Wikipedia's Barbaro family page would be back to balance, and I think we could then call this case closed.F550 16:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Now, I would like to begin working on the proper restoration of this page professionally, but I can't do it right if people begin remmoving my work. I would also have to delete this talk page and write out the information more clearly on how to get to the Met page and the Barbaro portrait in the National Gallery etc. I was working with Haemo yesterdy on this systematically. I left a message for him as well that we would pick it up again today since it was very late a night when we started. Now, I would like to begin the restoration. Will someone please respond so I know we are all on the same page.ThanksF550 16:50, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

F550, you cannot delete this talk page: It exists as a record of discussion about the article, and if you remove the comments of other users, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. With regard to expanding the article, I'd recommend that you read very carefully the comments of Andrew Lenahan at the beginning of this section. My suggestion would be to add one section at a time, providing a clear citation for each statement in the section, and wait to see if any of the information is challenged before proceeding further. (And note that, for the purposes of Wikipedia, unpublished sources like "some obscure goldenbook of a small village" are not acceptable; see WP:URS.) There's no need for rush in expanding the article, and given the article's dubious edit history, I'm sure everyone wants to ensure that any material added to it is indeed derived from reliable and verifiable sources. Deor 17:22, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Let me also do a few tests on the intro pargrph as listed on the page right now, i want to make sure the references are registering corectly when posted thanksF550 17:06, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• I'd suggest that you do not make any changes to the article yourself, you said on Friday you were employed by the Barbaro family, which would mean you have a conflict of interest (see WP:COI). You're free to discuss sources with us if you find them, though. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:13, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I am not employeed by the Barbaro family. I am a professional geneologist that conducts research through the Newberry Library of Geneological Records. I have no other interest than seeing good geneological information available to the public for research purposes.F550 17:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• You said on my talk page you were "Vitus's" personal assistant, and in this edit you claimed to be "representative of the Barbaro family for American and European relations". Higher up on this very page you wrote: "I work for Vitus Barbaro". Now you're saying you're a geneologist with no connections to the Barbaro family. Why the sudden change of position? Was "Vitus" so mad about the hoax that he fired his whole staff? Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:28, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I do not work for the Barbaro family. Mr. Barbaro may have his own assistants that have contacted you about this. I'm sure he does not want bogus information about secret societies out there.F550 17:37, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• If you don't work for him, why did you claim to be his assistant and to work for him? Was that part of the hoax, or were you working undercover or something? Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:RPA

• The statement below is part of the the hoax to cause turmoil and misinformation. These hoaxsters are trying to purposely fuel turmoil by posting lies, such as goldenbooks not being obtainable. It is all part of their Trouble making game.F550 19:05, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
  • • The statement above is symptomatic of the hoaxer's insecurity at being revealed and is basic psychological projection as is made abundantly clear by reading everything the hoaxer has posted, and I might add by following my IP# trail on wikipedia, which has never been associated with perpetuating any of this hoax, on the contrary, I have been trying to expose it from the beginning. hyper_individualist@yahoo.com

--76.83.249.234 19:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

The hoaxer was exposed so thoroughly that they realized they had to appear to come clean, so they pretended to be very upset about the hoaxer using their computer, and have claimed to be representatives of Fenwick, the Barbaro family, and adventurer travelling historians, and no doubt many other things. Now we have the hoaxer still trying to work in VV Barbaro nonsense citing the unobtainable golden books as his source into this article on the Barbaro family. This hoaxer continually refers to "the hoaxer jerk" when in actuality, HE IS THE HOAXER JERK and continues to pollute wikipedia. This obsessed hoaxer must be purged from wikipedia. He must be banned utterly, along with his numerous aliases. He has sowed entirely too much confusion here. I recognize the same ranting, long posts and the same rudeness. So now you have learned to hide your IP somehow Tiki-Two, so what? TIKI-TWO I SEE YOU!

I think the funniest thing about this deranged, obsessed, long-winded hoaxer at least in this discussion page was the statement that the Barbaro family discovered sexual reproduction. Now that was a hoot. So now let's see you come in here and butcher my post again, Tiki-Two/F550/65 IP#/Tiki-1 Ebay account name lunatic that thinks he is a noble named VV Barbaro. hyper_individualist@yahoo.com--76.83.249.234 17:40, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

---

THIS IS NOT TRUE

I said that I am not employeed by Mr. Barbaro. Which I am not. I am a geneologist period. I was contacted by his assistant Grace to look into this. I am using Grace's lap top and have just started a new account on Wikipedia that you can check for yourself. I don't know everyone that has contacted you about this, but I was contacted by Grace to get matters cleared up. From my understanding the secret society nonsense was started up by someone in his mailroom, and I was called up by Grace to handle things that are beyond her knowledge. I do not have a lap top and am using Grace's.F550 17:52, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Now, I understand that Grace has explained what has occured. I will not be insulted. What is all this nonsense of no goldenbooks. That is rediculous. It is the most important source for geneology research, and for the record, this encyclopedia of nobility that everyone is questioning is this source: Vittorio Spretti; Enciclopedia Storico-Nobiliare Italiana. Now, I would like to clear up this matter once and for all.

• Once again STOP REMOVING OTHER PEOPLE'S TALK PAGE MESSAGES. If you do this again you will be blocked and the page will be protected. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:12, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Everyone is tired of all of this. The situation has been explained I was an expert notified to look into this. What is the answer to this situation once and for allF550 18:15, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

We would like an answer. The situation has been explained. Proof has been given. Sources that people can check have been listed. What more do you want for verification. More sources have been given to this article than 1/2 of anything out there on Wikipedia. People like this Starblind love to jump in and switch all the Barbaro family information around, he loves to listen to the advice of novices like genio that have clearly been proven to be wrong. Now I have been called in a geneologist expert, that has been giving you valid sources and information that you can check with ISBN numbers and Web pages etc etc etc, and that is still not good enough. What is going to make you happy. You tell me. What are you looking for? What do you want? The article now has been completely destroyed to nothing. Great work Starblind. Lets just pretend that the web pages to validate the arms that were given just don't exist, right? Let's just pretend that Fallopio is a figment of the world's imagination. Starbling and this hoaxer are equally immature. When a person provides sources, Met museum evidence, and all of the other things like museum exhibition etc etc etc. What more can you ask for. We all don't have time for this anymore. We would like a final solution to this situation. Thank youF550 18:29, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Now I am going to throw the ball into your court. Prove to me that what is even written on the Barbaro page now is valid. There are no sources. You seem to be the expert on what is there. You put it there. If I'm correct the advice of keeping the first parragraph was given by Genio to you. Who was already proven to have no credit. Why should anyone take your word that what is on there now is even correct if you can not prove to me that what is up there now, than I will flag the whole page to be deleted. Prove to me that what you have placed there is valid and provide me with the exact sources for those points that are on there now.F550 18:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

"novices like genio " Oh I wish I was? - and just where did you learn your Italian - surely not on one of the "palazzos" along the Grand Canal. Stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes and be sensible - you are fooling no-one. Save your delusions for some high school kids. Giano 21:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

---

WP:RPA

A geneologist expert has been brought in to verify the previous article. Several of the points have already been proven with verifiable facts and evidence. Yet, when those point are made evidently clear both starbling and Hyper-individualist@Yahoo.com continue to ignore it and chose not to respond. The true hoax on this Barbaro family page is that these two individuals are trying to ignore verifiable evidence and have set out to destroy good knowledge for everyone- verifiable knowledge. Starblind has decided to put what ever he wants on the page but can not provide a single source of evidence to validate his selection. These two hoaxers have only one desire, but to detroy good validated information for the public and to extend turmoil. These two hoaxers continually make attempts to stop progress and provide no real solutions for Wikipedia problems . I suggest that Starblind be removed from Wikipedia editing. He is a trouble maker of the highest category and ignores reason.F550 18:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• I think the above speaks for itself. Once a hoaxer is caught, they will accuse others of doing what they are--it's basic projection. I wonder if Starblind is equally amused at the above as I am as we don't even know one another. A self-touted "geneologist expert" (sic). This says it all. A true genealogist would at least know how to spell the name of their vocation. I'm sure the audacity of a non-Wikipedia member telling an actual member that he should be removed from wikipedia is plain to everyone. As a non-member, I would never have such audacity to call for a member to be removed. I am, however calling for the non-member hoaxer with many aliases to go away and am begging members to purge him from wikipedia. My email is public. This "genologist" likes to hide behind his aliases. His admixture of fact, delusion, rudeness and paranoid harrangue reveals him to be the true hoaxer. hyper_individualist@yahoo.com --76.83.249.234 19:14, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Your repeated attempts to rely upon a supposed book which no one can find exists anywhere won't fly. Nobody denies that a Golden Book exists, but no one believes that there is a Golden Book of Venice nor a Golden Book of the Barbaro family. Unless you provide proof of the existence of these books, they cannot be used for references. Read WP:RS. The references must be available to others for review. Corvus cornix 20:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

We all have had enough of this. My profession is being questioned now, and this hoax nonsense goes on and on. For the record, if people want to believe it or not, there is only one hoax. Some jerk kid taking real Barbaro info and trying to use it to substantiate a bogus secret society page called "The Order of Skull and Crescent" or what ever he named it, and he was trying to say that Vitus Barbaro was the head of this secret society which was not true. That's is it. The Barbaro page was always good and valid sourced info-period. Now, we keep going back to this Golden book situation over and over. First please read Libro d'Oro. It talks about the variety of Goldenbooks. Do you even understand what a golden book is. It was just the register of nobility and royalty that stated peoples names and facts about their lives and the titles they had. That is all it was. Back in the day, it was proof of what kind of political powers people have, but now noble and royal families still register in it to just maintain the history of their family That is it. Vitus Barbaro can have all the titles in the world, which he has many, but their is no political power attached to it. He is just some hard working American, like everyone else, but from royal/noble heritage- case closed. I'm sure you maintain your family heritage what ever it may be-wearing a scottish kilt at a wedding, or breaking the glass at a Jewish wedding, or what ever. Nobility is a culture too-passing on titles is a tradition-that's it. There are all kinds of different registers all over Europe, there was the Almanac de Gotha, there was Governmental records-do you remeber the source that said (Rome, Calabria). There was the encyclopedia by Spretti-which I listed the full title already previously-do a search on it you will find it. All of these sources are available for review by the public and are valid sources. You can buy golden books, you can go to these governmantal centers, whatever have you. Now one last thing, I will only contue on this if people from Wikipedia get involved immediately. I do not have all the time in the world to waiste on this. If Wikipedia values their available knowledge then get involved now. It is no big woop for Vitus Barbaro, he will just go on with his life being who he is- it is all of you and Wikipedia searchers that will loose out of info. The Barbaro family today know who they are, and know their history well-they don't need a Wikipedia page to tell them this. It is there for the benefit of others.

The simple fact is that no one can verify that the key source this page tries to cite even exists. Wikipedia requires verifiability, and this source does not meet this standard. --Haemo 21:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Look I don't want to boast here, but I wrote the Palladian page, I have written pages on the Grimaldi and I also wrote most of Libro d'Oro and started Almanac de Gotha. I am not convinced by anyhting you are claiming about the Barbaro. I do not say you are wrong just I would like to see some better references cited to books and page numbers - do that and you are home and dry. Simple. Giano 21:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

We have all had enough of this. To all, with all due respect, my advise, just return the Barbaro family page that was perfectly cited before the jerk hoaxer came. Then, blank this talk page to start fresh and we are done. I'm not going to have the same talk over and over again. It is the same talk that is all the way at the top of this page. If you go into the Libro d'Oro page it explains Venetian Golden Books, you can find them in genealogical libraries, you can buy them, you can even replace that source with Spretti. That is why Spretti was even listed as a source. Do a google for Spretti's source you will find it too. It is just another type of register that says the same thing. There are several substitutes. The Barbaro family page existed perfectly fine with out any conversation on it's talk page before the hoaxer. There was no need to have talk on it's talk page because it was beatifullly written with all sources listed. If Wikipedia values their data-base of information than that is what Wikipedia should do. It was perfect, accurate, and sourced. Thank you, and have a good day to all.

We are all having a marvellous day thanks, can you give us a link to the version of the page you think was beautifully written with all sources listed. Thanks. Giano 22:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, I will bring up the original page that was there before the hoaxer came along and I will mark as "THE TRUE BARBARO FAMILY PAGE AS IT SHOULD LIST ON WIKIPEDIA" Thank you very much

No just give us a link to it please. I have spent time doing my own Barbaro research today - I want to see if the facts in what you calim to be the authentic page match. Could you explain please also why the Curtis family came to be living at the Palazzo Barbaro - be warned I know the answer - I just wonder if you do? Giano 22:39, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• I have reverted your edit to the page because "The Barbaro family is a Venetian noble family who evolved from the Julii of ancient Rome" is incorrect, the claim is only made by unwriiten family legend - no documented proof exists. I advise you to go no further with this rubbish. Giano 22:44, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Sir please, it is written in Spretti on page 274. I already wrote about that previously. Also, if you look at the Timpietto, you should know that, it was Palladio's last work he made for the family on the property at Maser. The sculptural program specifically is showing the family taking a stand against Diocletian's perseculation of the Christians to reference their early Roman roots. Please sir. We need to stop this. The page is acurate and needs to be returned. Thank you.

Could you please explain why, someone who works for Vitus Barbaro and is a professional genealogist (who can't spell the term) and historian, posts from a Microsoft Corporation IP address? Corvus cornix 23:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Corvus, I don't know what you are talking about. I have nothing to do with Microsoft. Please, stop this.

Semiprotected again... just lovely.

With 4 re-insertions of the same content again within an hour or so, it's clear I shouldn't have unprotected this earlier today. Semi-protected again. *sigh* Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:32, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Dynamic IP Nest

The Italianate drama which is this page is totally getting out of hand. So far, we have the following people arguing on the "pro-Barbaro" side:

• 65.54.154.24 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.155.41 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.97.196 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.154.26 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.155.15 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.98.30 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

All of these IP addresses come from the same location, One Microsoft Way, in Redmond, Washington. If you check the related article, The Sacred Order of Skull and Crescent, you will see that similar IP addresses:

• 65.54.97.190 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.155.35 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.154.25 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.154.118 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.155.11 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 65.54.154.116 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

All of which resolve to the same address, and in The Pugilist Club, another related article, address:

• 65.54.98.111 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

Also resolves to the same address. Previously, it has been clear that Tiki-two (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) was the same editor as the second block of IP addresses. It is therefore reasonable to believe that Tiki-two is all of these IP addresses, and I will be filing a checkuser request to confirm this. I would also stand to believe that F550 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) will resolve to the same address as well, and constitutes as second account of this user.

Andrew Lenahan, if you have a checkuser privileges, you could short-cut this process and save us all a lot of time and head-ache. Haemo 23:49, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

• I don't have checkuser, and in any case I don't think a checkuser is needed here: all of the above are pretty clearly adding the same stuff. Even in the hoaxer's own version of the story, it's 3 different people (a "kid" hired by the Barbaro family to check mail, Barbaro's personal assistant named Grace, and an unnamed professional geneologist hired by "Vitus Barbaro" to "fix" the article), all of whom use the same laptop computer. So that all the edits are coming from the same computer is not in dispute. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:11, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• Haemo, what was the source of F550's contribution to this diff on your talk page. If it's not just another lie, the time mentioned would confirm that the hoaxer(s) is/are based in the central time zone of the U.S., which would be evidence for the possible Fenwick H.S. connection. Deor 01:36, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

• Well, I don't really know any more than what the diff says, but if it's accurate, you might be right. --Haemo 01:43, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

But in that edit you added both parts of the exchange to your talk page. Where did F550's message originally appear? Deor 02:03, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, if you check the time-stamps, it originally was on my userpage. I moved it, and replied to it, on my talk page in a single edit. --Haemo 02:05, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Comments such as "You could also check with msnhst@microsoft.com., who is in charge of the 154.54.65.in-addr.arpa. zone." from RDNS makes me think the 65.54.*.* person might just be using an MSN account and not necessarily be a Microsoft employee. Cardamon 10:05, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

In addition to User:F550, an IP was blocked today for making the same personal attacks:

• 76.83.249.234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

--Aude (talk) 02:15, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I would have to question that blocking as looking at their contributions they seem to have been trying to expose this fraud as much as we are. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 10:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hardly. They were trying to cover up their activities. Corvus cornix 22:27, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I think Gustav was referring to User:76.83.249.234, who did go a bit overboard in some comments, so the temporary block can certainly be justified. Deor 22:31, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

It seems a little unfair to me, there doesn't seem to be anything particularly bad in their comments. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:52, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I was surprised by the block too; but it won't kill the guy, who seems to be taking it pretty well, judging by the responses on his talk page (though he clearly disagrees with it). Deor 00:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Gustav, I misunderstood who you were talking about. Corvus cornix 01:46, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Can someone please block the real hoaxer who keeps posting on my page Special:Contributions/65.54.154.152. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 08:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

And not only on yours... I warned him, to no effect, and have now blocked him. Bishonen | talk 09:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC).

Grimaldi

Here is the Grimaldi dynasty [7] please explain whre the Barbaro are connected. Of from this less official but more comprehensive tree with details of all the branches [8]. Then this can then be verified. Thanks. Giano 06:29, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

it has just occurred to me did the original writer of the article claiming ties with the Grimaldi family actually mean the Grimani family, as this would be far more likely? Giano 08:21, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Whether they meant it or not we'll never know. However they are connected to the Grimani as I think the book I referenced last night mentions it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 08:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Note the Grimani family chapel was in San Francesco della Vigna. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 08:35, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Well done Gustav - that seems far more logical - I always felt the Grimaldi connection was dodgy. Giano 08:45, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Hobson's Great Houses

There was a book "Great Houses of Europe" from 1961 edited by Sacheverell Sitwell. Where does Anthony Hobson fit in? And how can a book from 1961 have an ISBN when ISBNs were only invented in 1966? Is it a re-printed re-edited version or what? DrKiernan 10:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Indeed it was edited by Sitwell with different authors contributing to various chapters, the chapter concerning Barbaro os by Hobson. The book merely has a forward by Sitwell. It has an ISBN because I was using the 1970 reprint. Giano 10:57, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Question regarding "Male line"

This is a quote from the article as it now stands: "The male line of the Venetian branch of the family died out in the 18th century." So, presumably, the female branch of the line has somehow been succeeding at reproducing only females? Did someone read Houston, Houston, Do You Read? or something here? If it is supposed to mean that the Barbaro name has died out by lack of males to carry it on, I think a more direct statement to that effect would be in order. John Carter 19:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

It's a fee wiki, if you know something add it and cite it. Giano 23:18, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes it means that the male bearers of the name have supposedly died out. Although there is actually a Paolo Barbaro, native of Venice who actually recently wrote a book on it but maybe he was a descendent of immigrants? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 18:00, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Spelling variations include: Barbaro, Barbara, Barabari, Barbarino, Barbarella, Barbarelli, Barbarotti and many more.

This upper sentence on this talk page has some problems to it since names like "Barbara" etc. are derived from the name "Barbaro", but are not family names that have a direct relation to the aristocratic Barbaro family. There would not be someone of the aristocratic Barbaro family who would have the name "Barbara" etc. This point should be made clear.

Defining the Venetian Line

The article of the Barbaro family states that the male line of the Venetian branch died out. One would have to be careful about such a statement or should phrase it in a more approriate manner. First off, how is one defining "Venetian branch". The main Venetian branch is the "San Vidal" branch which has become extinct. However, if we are defining a Venetain branch of the family by the branches who have the title "Patrician of Venice", which would make them Venetian nobility, than this statement is not correct. For example, the "San Giorgio branch" is not Venetian because they lost the title "Patrician of Venice" and became solely Maltese nobility even though at one time they were of the same Venetain Barbaro family. There is another branch who were the Barons dell'Albergo that continue to exist and also have the title "Patrician of Venice" though they primarily held positions away from Venice and were aslo linked to the Austrian Habsburg House. I would not label this branch as Austrian- I would still coinsider them Venetian. Finally, there were very minor branches called "San Angelo" and "San Gregorio" who were not able to marry into their proper social class and were removed from nobility status all together.

If editing on the main article was opened up, I would phrase some of the wording on the article differently to be more specific and clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.155.57 (talk • contribs)

Palazzi Barbaro

When discussing Palazzi Barbaro, we can be talking about two different palaces for two different branches of the Barbaro family. The San Vidal branch, who owned the large Palazzo Barbaro on the Grand Canal in the San Vidal neighborhood, and the Albergo branch who owned Palazzi Barbaro-Dario. Both branches palazzi are comprised of two joining palaces. Palazzi Barbaro-Dario is made up of a gothic structure and a unique marble clad structure that is often referred to being in the "Byzantine" style, though Ruskin still often referred to Dario as being Gothic style as well. Palazzo Barbaro at San Vidal is made up of a gothic structure and a baroque structure.

Right now, this article states that the San Vidal branch built the large Gothic Palazzo Barbaro, but this needs clarification. The San Vidal branch bought first the Gothic palace designed by the Bon brothers from a previous noble family and then later decided to build a second baroque palace right next to it to house the family's ball rooom. Therefore, what the San Vidal branch did was by buy one gothic structure and built a baroque structure right next to the palace they already owned.

Hence, when we are saying Palazzo Barbaro, I am asuming that we are referring exclusively to the San Vidal palace, which is fine, and the Albergo palace would then be Palazzo Barbaro-Dario. Nonetheless, the article right now states that the San Vidals built the large Gothic Palazzo Barbaro which isn't completely correct. They bought Palazzo Barbaro, a gothic structure in the San Vidal neighborhood, and they built the Baroque palace right next to the gothic structure they already owned but did not build. I will go into the article and make this point clear. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.143.240.79 (talk) 12:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Red Links

Red Links on the Barbaro family article should remain to indicate where continued development needs to occur. If we are to seperate Palazzo Barbaro from Palazzo Barbaro-Dario, than the later deserves a red link to indicate where continued research needs to occur. Also, the two current heads of the existing branches of the Barbaro family are also noteworthy and deserve to remain as a red link. The information that was listed about them is what was included in the Giles source. I do not know any more about them than what listed there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.142.117.219 (talk) 19:57, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

If you look on the archived portion of this discussion page, you'll see that User:Starblind has commented: "In particular, editors should watch for mentions of 'Vitus Barbaro', on whom no reliable sources--or indeed any sources at all--have emerged. Sourcing on biographies of living persons is taken extremely seriously on Wikipedia, and claiming to have gotten a letter from some guy or called up a high school teacher is not a reliable source, and even if it's true (a doubtful scenario, let's face it), would constitute original research, which is also forbidden on Wikipedia." Unless you can come up with impeccable sources establishing this fellow's existence, and establishing that either of the two persons you added to the list (which is, after all, headed "Notable members"), are notable, the entries in question have no place in the article. Deor 20:45, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

• The above statement is no longer relevant- there is most definetly a reliable source proving his existence- however there is still nothing that I know of that can say anything more about this individual's life. Bogus things may have been made up about him, but he is realSave venice 06:25, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
• I agree that a letter from a particular person or one person's first hand account would not be a very good source for an encylopedia article. I had the opportunity to go back to the previous talk statements and now see what you are talking about. I was basing my information on the Giles source that stated exactly what I wrote the second time. I can't tell you anything more about the heads than what I put there, but since there is verification as these people existing from a credible source, I think they should remain as red links. I would think that the information of the current heads are useful because that is a valuable source of information to learn how the family has developed- and in my opinion, it is worthy to remain as a red link, but what I would do is watch very closely what happens to those red links. If someone starts writing information about these individuals than make sure that it is sourced well. But for the record, these people listed as red links do exist, and should in my opinion remain. Wikipedia probably just had a childish Dracula/Transylvania prank played with this page, but what I have written is 100% accurate. I'm involved with the Save Venice orgnaization, and I'm also new to Wikipedia editing- I still need to create an account, but I made the first comments on this talk page, and when I saw that the article opend up, I thought that I would begin to improve a bit.I also improved upon the Palazzi Barbaro page as well with citations and made some minor adjustments to the Villa Barbaro page as well, but that one was pretty great as it was. If I have the chance to do more research with Palazzi Barbaro-Dario, I might open up an article on that as well- John Ruskin talked about Dario a great deal in his "Stones of Venice" and the Barbaro palazzo at the San Vio location is smaller than the San Vidal palace, but still very charming and very original- Palazzo Barbaro at San Vidal just recently went through a complete exterior restoration. So for the record, those heads do exist- and I can put them back- but watch them closely and see what happens to them. Let's give it a shot. If it turns out to be problematic than they could still be removed. Thanks for keeping a close eye on vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.142.117.219 (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I created an account under "save venice" and checked the source. I am 100% confident in both redlinks. Vitus Barbaro (1973-) is the 5th Princely Count from a line that was further established with Giambattista Barbaro who was titled via his father who first recieved the title in 1849. Vitus also holds the titles Patrician of Venice and Baron dell' Albergo and is the current head of the Albergo branch and only titled holder of that branch with future issue passing through him exclusively. For the other group, the head is Dr. Anthony Cremona Barbaro (1955-) who is titled as the 9th Marquis of San Giorgio, the branch may also use the title Count von Zimmerman for all members across the board. There is no biographical information listed for either of these individuals and only the San Giorgio branch is noted as being Maltese. The Albergo branch is regarded as being in relation to but not of the San Giorgio line. Save venice 00:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I just went back in and also removed the 2nd redlink from the San Giorgio branch. I have no doubt what so ever that both Vitus and Antonio are real people, but I question their importance of being part of the "notable members" section, aside from the one known fact of the two being the current heads of the Albergo and San Giorgio branches. I would feel more comforable if there was first a blue link for the both of them to first establish their importance before they were added to a "notable members" section. Until more is known about either of them, I think it is best for them to remain out.Save venice 00:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Palazzo Barbaro-Dario

Previous redlink has now been turned into an article, if anyone knows how to add a picture to the page please do so. I do not know how to do that. The Monet picture is copy-right free ThanksSave venice 06:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Are possitive Monet was connected with the Palazzi Barbaro-Dario rather than the Palazzi Barbaro on the Grand Canal? Giano 16:54, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

You are correct that Monet was a guest at Palazzo Barbaro at San Vidal, but the painting I am talking about is specifically a picture of Palazzi Barbaro-Dario. Monet painted it while setting up his easel across the grand canal of Venice to capture Palazzi Barbar-Dario in its entirety. This particular painting is in the collection of the Art Institute of Chicago. There is even a poster that a web site is selling of it- let me see if I can add the website of that- and if you can add the picture of it to the page.Save venice 17:21, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Show me the link and i will add it, though it is very easy - just save it to your computer then click on Uplpoad file and follow the instructions. Giano 17:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

We are in luck, the picture is on tour right now at the Tate! go to www.tate.org.uk; then search "Palazzo Dario 1908"; from there you will be able to get the painting which says "Palazzo Dario 1908 Art Institute of Chicago" You can enlarge the image and get a good shot of it. The red building on the left is Barbaro and the white with round oculi is Dario. See if you can add it to the page. ThanksSave venice 17:32, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I tried to add the Monet picture, but I don't know how to do it- if you can do that Giano, that would be great- if you are having a problem using the tate source, just google "Palazzo Dario 1908 Monet" and a ton of other sources will pop up with that image- The Art Institute of Chicago site and others. thanksSave venice 02:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

This one [9]? Giano 06:28, 3 October 2007 (UTC) is presumably the same as this foto here [10] Giano 06:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I have uploaded the image, edited the page, and changed its name to Palazzo Dario is this is the more common and correct name. Giano 08:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes that is the picture, and your revisions are fine, though when we use Palazzi-Barbaro-Dario we are making a better effort of including the two palazzi together- but that is clarified in the text- so it is OK. The last portion about it being unlucky is something that I removed- it is in the nature of superstition and a bit trivia like for a page that is meant to have an architectural subject matter. That point should be kept out- otherwise, it looks good GianoSave venice 11:38, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

When we are talking about "Palazzo Barbaro-Dario", it is a way of talking about TWO palaces that once belonged to one branch of the Barbaro family. One palace is just called Palazzo Barbaro and the other is called Palazzo Dario seperately. The page now as "Palazzo Dario" is just talking about one palace rather than two together as a single enity as it was often called when the Barbaro family owned both at the same time. Setting up a page as "Palazzo Barbaro-Dario" was a good way to talk about the other gothic palace as well, that is also very charming. Now, if we wanted to talk about that palace too, it is difficult on how to label it so it is not confussed with the one at San Vidal- Traditionally, people would say "Palazzo Barbaro-Dario". If you go to www.rosswarner.com and then go into Venice Tuscany and then "Up and down the grand canal" there is an excellent picture by the photographer that is labeled Palazzo Barbaro Palazzo Dario showing a good shot of both palaces.Save venice 18:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you are correct, but the palazzi are not known by that name at all today, or even in the recent past, in fact not since the 18th century - if at all. If you want to write about that particular Palazzo Barbaro you can easily do so by calling the page Palazzo Barbaro (Dorsoduro) Giano 18:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Francesco Barbaro

Do we actually have a source that says that this person was "Grand Prince for the Knighthood of the Order of the Dragon"?? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 10:09, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

That statement is correct, he was knighted as so on 1432 following the expansion of the order from 1431. However, there is no source currently listed from those now on the page that would indicate that. He was also a well known humanist. Let's change his description to humanist until the actual source can be cited.Save venice 12:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Giovanni Battista Line

The third branch of the family was removed by the justification that there is no source for them. This is not correct, and I will source it by Vittorio Spretti who completed a family history of the house. The third branch begins with Giovanni Battista who contiunued on with his son Giambattista that married a mediatized princessly line of the Campolongo and continued onwards. I will provide the source and page number for this when I return the section. Pleasse discuss matters on the talk page before removing relevant material.Save venice 17:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

You claimed that the Sala dell'Albergo in the Scuola Grande di San Rocco was named for the Albergo branch of the Barbaro family. This is false and I don't see why we should believe anything else you say. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 18:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I was edit conflicted - see below. -- !! ?? 19:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Battle of "Temsvar", and the Room of the "Albergo"

Further to the continued reversions and reinstatements, what was the Barbaro's "crucial involvement" in the Battle of Temsvar [sic]? (Incidentally, with the usual attention to detail, I believe this is meant to be the Battle of Temesvár, aka Timişoara.)

And the "famous" Sala dell'Albergo is not in the Chiesa di San Rocco di Venezia. The Chiesa di San Rocco does indeed contain certain Tinorettos. But so does the adjacent Scuola Grande di San Rocco, in its Sala dell'Albergo.[11][12]

I particularly recommend it:Scuola Grande di San Rocco, it:Chiesa di San Rocco (Venezia), and de:Sala dell'Albergo. The small upstairs chamber (albergo) was where the officers of the scuola - the Banca and Zonta - would meet (see Scuole Grandi of Venice). -- !! ?? 19:05, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Well there was no involvement as the Albergo branch do not exist! Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 19:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• please do not remove material from the page before discussion, especially when it is sourced, and second, please sign in so I know who you are- it lacks all credibility when you don't. I can't tell if this is all coming from one person. Let's take this step by step becasue there is much.

• First, it is the Temesvar (which was nothing more than a typo), and the one branch of Barbaro family provided additional support in unison with Czar Nicolas to stop Hungary from getting Transylvania which Hungary was initially winning- it turned all things around for Austria, later Austria made a comprimise to form the Austro/Hungarian empire and dismatled the Grand Principality of Transylvania- but the name in the form of the title Princely Count was awared as appreciation to the branch and the title is documeneted in the source that referenced that point.

• Second, The blue link of the Chiese di San Rocco discussed the Sala dell'Albergo with the paintings of Tintoretto and the Scuola and Chiesa are part of the same confraternity.

• Finally, translating Sala dell'Albergo into "Room of the Hostle" is a literal translation of those words. It is not a room used as a hotel or hostle (an albergo in Italy is more like a small hostle than a large scale hotel), they just do that because there is no word in English that means a noble Albergo, and you are correct that the Sala was used for the Banca and Zonta (Funders and Overseers) of the confraternity, which in this case is the Barbaro Albergo. There was also another confraternity set up in Catanzaro called the Sarti confraternity. Check www.EVRS.com Sala dell'Albergo "building and history" section that talks about the sala as the meeting room for the Banca and Zonta. I will go back in and reference the article.Save venice 19:57, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Everyone is signed in, as far as I am aware.

Please describe the nature of this additional military support. Did the Barbaros command a brigade, or a regiment? Or supply the weapons or munitions? Tag along with their family retainers? Put on a party afterwards?

You seem to be claiming that the Sala dell'Albergo is named after the Albergo branch of the Barbaro family. The other Scuole Grandi has similar rooms with the same name - did they also name them after the same family? What about their androne and salone? Is there an Androne branch of the family, or a Salone branch? Or perhaps Banca and Zonta?

Or perhaps the family took its name from the room (or a hostel!) rather than the other way around? Do you have a source to support your claim that the room was named after the family? -- !! ?? 21:00, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• First off, punctuation marks as someone's sign in is a bit confussing.

• OK, The Barbaro family also has a long association with the Imperial house, they were awarded the right to use the imperial eagle earlier on so there is a long history there- also Venice was under Austria at that time, so there is both political and military support in the Barbaro's allegience to Austria while other families may have supported other political entities. Austria looked to additional support from Russia and Venice to help stop Hungary from taking Transylvania. What is strange, is when Austria wins, they decide to give Transylvania to Hungry anyways, what is called the "Austrian Comprimise", so titling the Barbaro branch was in part a "Make Nice" move for the emperor after so many people supported him with sacrifice to keep Transylvania and then he gives it away as payment to Hungary so he could create his Austro-Hugarian Empire, so that is the story there. The BArbaro family never ruled Transylvania, they simply were awarded the title Gefurster Graf and the GP Transylvania name was slapped on it it to rember their sacrifice- but that's the story there.

• Also there seems to be some confussion in what an Albergo is. An Albergo is roughly a corporation that nobility started to do a number of things: make certain industries succeed, help the community by starting or supporting confraternities, etc. Alberghi(plural) also had their own governing structure to them as well and certain political powers- for example, the Barbaro family had baronial rights in southern Italy.

• The Albergo which the one Branch of the Barbaro family created helped support the confraternity in Venice and a meeting room for that Albergo was set up in the confraterity. "The Room for the Albergo"- it's in essence a boardroom for all the different members who were part of the Albergo to discuss business matters pertaining to the confraternity- that's all it is, but it is highly noted because of the beautiful paintings by Tintoretto that are in it to decorate it.

• When we call that particular branch the "Albergo" branch we do so because they simply were the ones that created an Albergo and then also had the title Barons dell'Albergo. In essence it is partially a nickname to distinguish that branch of the family, just like the San Giorgios are called that because they are the " Marquis of San Giogio", and the San Vidals are called such becasue that was the name of the neighborhood they were a part of. They are all just nicknames- so when someone at that time would say which Barbaro- they would say, "Oh, the one who has the Albergo" or "the one who lives at San Vidal." and the nicknames stuck over time. All Venetians have nicknames to differentiate branches.

• The Sala dell' Albergo is called such becasue it was used for the meeting room of the governing Albergo, and the one branch of the family is nicknamed Albergo becasue they organized their family branch into an Albergo- that's the story there, It is really no big dealSave venice 21:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

There are articles on !!, !!!, and ??, you know. ! is not just a punctiation mark - it is also a letter in various languages, a mathematical operator, and used in various forms of notation.

Anyway, unless you can provide a source to show otherwise, I suspect that the the Sala is named after the albergo of the Scuola Grande di San Rocco, rather than the room being named after the family. You seem to be saying that the albergo of the Scuola Grande di San Rocco is the same as the branch of the family that organised itself into an albergo - is that right? What about the alberghi of the other Scuole Grandi? -- !! ?? 09:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

So you are claiming they had the title "Barons dell'Albergo". Why is it I cannot find any match on the internet for that tor any similar term? Or is it only mentioned in the Enciclopedia Storico Nobiliari Italiana by Vittorio Spreti? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:48, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• There are a number of specific titular rights that all branches of the family had that don't show up readily. For example, the San Giorgio's are also "Signore Pietremela" which is a Lord of that place and they are also the Barons of Latrinico and the Albergo branch's title is also contained within "Nobile of Lombardy Veneto" which is a title that was used when Austria had control of Venice. Each branch will primarily use their main title. This is true even today, Prince Charles of England is also a Baron- but you rarely hear that said.Save venice 22:03, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

If you are really passionate about Venetian culture, you should get involved with the Save Venice Foundation. It is based in New York and there is another branch expanding in California. Save Venice has just completed restoring the palace at San Vidal and if you check out the Save Venice site there is a whole list of projects that are in need of restoration. The group is always looking for funding and support for those that are interested in preserving Venetian culture- you should check it out!Save venice 22:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

You could start at Save Venice Foundation to accompany Venice in Peril. (Reminds me of SAVE Britain's Heritage, which I wrote yesterday. Is it connected with their offshoot, SAVE Europe's Heritage?) -- !! (?? 09:34, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't tell me! I have guessed it - you are Bea Guthrie. Giano 22:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't say (lol), but I am interested to continue to address Venetian subjects on Wikipedia. A page that I would like to work on next is Palladio's Villa Pojana- that is a unique structure for Palladio and also went through a restoration not too long ago- well relative to the building's age- are you familiar with Pojana?Save venice 22:23, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope! Giano 22:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

There is a page on Wikipedia about it right now, but it isn't very good and Pojana is probably the most curious example off all of Palladio's works- especially it's central passage way. If you are intersted, do a little research on that one and why don't you meet me over there next and we can tackle that one.Save venice 22:30, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, its here Villa Pojana. There are some pictures of it on Wikimedia Commons http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Villa_Pojana and the italian article here it:Villa Pojana. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 22:39, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

If you can put up pictures that would be great! I'm not good with that. I just pulled out some Pojana sources out to use. Why don't we move over to Pojana and fix that one upSave venice 22:47, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I added the pictures. Feel free to rearrange them. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:11, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Save Venice the problem with the Albergo claim is I nor anyone can find any source that mentions a Barbaro family and the Albergo nickname together. Can you give an EXACT source or sources that states that there is a Barbaro branch called the Albergo and then people can go and check it. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

• The source that I used on the Palazzo Barbaro page "Venetian Palaces" on p20 has a large discussion about family nicknames and has a large listing of many of them. Some are very funnny like one that is called the "ditch jumpers" which for a Venetian would be like saying you wear "floods" or "clam diggers". Sometimes branches even have more than one nickname too. The branch that we are referring to as the "Albergo" branch tends to be called "Barbaro dell'Albergo" and "Barbaro della Fornace" because they were the ones that had the Albergo and resided at Pallazo Barbaro-Dario. The other group is called "Barbaro di San Vidal" and "Barbaro di Maser" because they resided at the San Vidal Palace and they had Villa Barbaro. The dominant branch was always the San Vidals, but when Venice crashes, their line gets hit hard, while Albergo survives via their silk production in the south, but in the latter 19th century, the silk production industry also collapses. So many people who are genuine nobility often suffered a great deal and were forced to re-locate to other countries. In Venice, they called these unfortunate souls as "Barnabotti". You will find information about the Albergo line under "Barbaro and della Fornace". Those are the ones that had the Albergo. But using the Albergo nickname is more significant because this branch who were also the "Barons dell'Albergo" used Albergo often in the manner of a surname as part of a courtesy title- so some of these Barbaros of the Albergo branch are calling themselves "Albergo" rather than even "Barbaro" and this is why we still prefer Albergo as the main nickname. This also the case for the San Giorgios who even go so far as to use St. George as a surname-so it is rather complex. For clarity you can also add "della Fornace" as an Albergo nickname- but it's the same lineSave venice 23:59, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

"and this is why we still prefer Albergo as the main nickname"...I assume by "we" you are saying that you are a member of the American Barbaro family and a claimant to be part of this Albergo branch? Again, I don't think we can include anything about an Albergo branch or a "Barbaro della Fornace" branch until we have checked the references that you have given. I have done a few quick searches for "Barbaro della Fornace" and can find no trace of that phrase. I think the problem is that you might be getting these nicknames from family knowledge and we can't really include that unless it has been discussed in a reputable source. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 12:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• By "we", I am referring to Save Venice and the community of Venetian historians. I am not of this family, infact, I am not even of Italian descent. If you do a search with "Barbaro" and "della Fornace" you should be brought to the Dario palace and location of where that branch resided. I can go into the text and try to clarify the use of nicknames, but this is just the way that Branch is talked about. They were the ones that had the silk Albergo and they were the ones who resided at Palazzo-Dario- at the "della Fornace" location. I will go in and explain more clearly. Also, moving over to Villa Pojana- which I started with that, can you move all the images to the right side of the page. I'm having trouble with that, Thanks, GustavSave venice 14:03, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Right, the thing is we need to have written sources that mention the use of the Albergo and della Fornace nicknames, we can't just rely on your word. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 15:28, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

First, titular rights that include Albergo privliges via Nobile of Lomardary Veneto and that of the Venice and Malta are fully documented in Spretti source.

Second, the use of nicknames is fully outlined in "Venetian Palaces" by use of contrada etc.etc. Those words are directly take from that source by the author himself. When talking about the branch of people associated with the location at Maser, people will say they are "The Barbaro at San Vidal", "The Barbaro Palace at San Vidal", "The Barbaro at Maser". That is just the way anyone would talk about that line. If you are talking about the ones in Malta, one will say "The Barbaro who are the Marchese of San Giorgio" of the "Barbaro who are the Marquis of St. George". The other line is referred to as The Barbaro who have an Albergo" and the Barbaro who have their palace on Rio della Fornace". Thats all, and then it's just simplified "San Vidals", "San Giorgios", "Albergo", "della Fornace" etc. No one will care that much if one is using San Vidal or Maser of di Maser or Masero to address that line. It's all acceptable. Go to www.rosswarner.com which is a site of an architectural photographer and go into Venice : Up and down the grand canal. The Barbaro palace of that location is called Palazzo Barbaro on Rio della Fornace. If you feel unconfortable with these nicknames put in italics that I can work it out differently, but it is really not needed. But I will do it anyways- but it makes it far more difficult to establish clarity to each line- because it is simply the way everyone in the intellectal community talks about branch's of Venetian families.Save venice 16:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

What you say may well be true but I can't find anywhere that actually says that these Barbaro branches had these nicknames. Unless it is written in a reputable source that the branches have these nicknames then I don't think we can include this information. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 10:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I should just add I do not dispute the Maltese San Giorgio/St. George branch, but I have yet to see any convincing evidence of the use of the "San Vidal", "Albergo", "della Fornace" or "di Maser" nicknames. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 11:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Here is a real life member of the Maltese Barbaro branch, Edward St. George, barrister, international businessman, racehorse owner and philanthropist. Here is his Telegraph obituary. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 11:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Cadet branches

"The Princely Counts of the Grand Princes of Transylvania to the House of Habsburg-Lorraine" does not mean as the article states they were elevated to a cadet branch of Royalty. If they were indeed given a princely tile it was most likely as "serene" highness not "royal". Secondly a cadet branch of any family, royal or otherwise, is a family related by blood and descent, usually from a junior son whose family have been given lesser titles than that of the main branch. No one can be made a cadet branch. Giano 06:19, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Where is the source that says a Barbaro was awarded this title? Is it in Enciclopedia Storico Nobiliari Italiana by Vittorio Spretti? I think we need someone to look at this book before we include any of these claims. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 10:59, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Maltese Barbaros

OK, I don't doubt there is a family of Barbaros that settled in Malta and that they had the title Marchese di San Giorgio and later Count von Zimmerman through marriage. What seems less clear is that this Barbaro family is connected to the Venetian family. This tree traces only to a Pietro Barbaro of Naples who married Marietta Mancini at Valetta in 1631. If it is so certain that this family is connected to the Venetian family how is it that the "Libro d'Oro di Melita" does not show how Pietro Barbaro is related to them? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 11:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi guys, I just wrote out a big explanation, but lost my info with an edit conflict, so I don't feel like doing it again, but look at the source you pulled up- It says it right there in the second big black listing "Venetian Patrician". That was the last to be so, and there after they were just Maltese. I am curious, why are you so fixated with this one family?Save venice 14:10, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

You also seem to be hung up on the whole GP Trans. part. You do understand that that is something Austrian and not Draculian. It is the way that they are fashioned, but there seem to be some issue about that, so I took it out, but every time I do this we loose more and more information. This is the last time I will be coming to this page for discussion. The article is acceptable now, and all info there is cited accordingly. I have also moved onto Palladio's Villa Foscari, if any of you have a picture to add please add it, and I hope we may meet up again on another article. Best wishes to youSave venice 14:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I see what is going on here, I had the chance to look at Gustav, Deor, and Giano's pages- and I see there was some problem with a the Fenwick high school page too. I am sorry guys, I thought you had a genuine interest in this topic. I think I will cool off with Wikipedia. If the red links remain, I may look into matters with those two and expand them accurately, but I just have to see how I feel- I no longer feel that I am enjoying myself any longer with this- and I especially don't feel that I am contributing to education- this is all too childish. Someone clearly saw Vitus's name and Transylvania and thought that he would be a good target to attack. Living out some Dracula fantasy I guess- G.P of Trans. has nothing to do with Dracula- it is Austrian. I suggest that all the Barbaro family talk pages and that of Fenwick high school too is gotten rid of or at least stored away, and a fresh talk page is begun.Save venice 02:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Naming

Venetian culture has a long tradition of using family nicknames to define various branches of a particular patrician family. These nicknames were often based on the neighborhoods where they lived, fuedal holdings or titles, fields of interest as well as many other defining qualities. The Barbaro family also has nicknames that have become common usage within the art historical community:

The most famous branch who owned Palazzo Barbaro and Villa Maser is typically called San Vidal, based on the name of their neighborhood in Venice.

The branch who had an Albergo and lived in Palazzo Dario were often called Albergo as well as Fornace due to them owning an Albergo and being the Barons dell'Albergo and becuase of the location of the Canal della Fornace near their Palazzo.

The third branch is typically called by the nickname San Giorgio because they were the Marquis of San Giorgio (anglicised as St. George).

Both the Albergo and St. George branches have also used ther nicknames as surnames. Some legitimate Barbaro members used Albergo and St. George as their surname.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Save venice (talk • contribs)

Sourcing

All sources need to meet citation guidelines; this includes verifiability. In this case, while there was a lecture series given about Venice by the Save Venice NY chapter in 2007, with the guest listed attending, it appears to have been "San Sebastiano: Veronese's Church", not the Barbaro family as the citation notes. Regardless, it's totally unverifiable; the lecture was never published, and no one can check to see that it ever existed. As such, I've removed the material. I would also note that Yale does not offer a PhD in Venetian Studies. --Haemo 05:05, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Re:Modern Barbaros

I am sorry that Save venice was blocked because I think they may have been genuine if a little misguided. It may be that this Albergo branch is documented in the "Enciclopedia Storico Nobiliari Italiana" by Vittorio Spretti, however even if they were I am not sure that S Barbaro would meet Wikipedia notability guidelines and we can't just document all the people related to one family that was once influential. I am not even certain that we should include the Maltese branch as I haven't seen anything which links them definitively to the earlier Venetian family apart from a claim on this website and a family tree here which doesn't give a direct link to this Venetian family although it does say Venetian patrician. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 17:28, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, it appears both those websites were made by Charles Said Vassallo, an Australian pest controller of Maltese descent who claims to be a Count - see this usenet discussion. It appears he has made numerous articles on Wikipedia which may not be reliable. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 18:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

..and Mr Vassallo's email address listed on his site bears more than a passing rememblence in name to User: Tancarville. Giano 20:33, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

From reading various discussions on Usenet I get the impression that the "Libro d'Oro di Melita" was an unpublished work by Mr. Said-Vassallo's granndfather so some of it MAY be accurate. Unfortunately it looks like Mr. Said Vassallo has added to it and he admits himself that he is only an amateur and hasn't quite found the right document that confirms that he is a Count... So can we accept the Libro d'Oro di Melita as a reliable source? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:14, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Great Houses of Europe

I cannot find such a book by Anthony Hobson but I can find one by Sacheverell Sitwell? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 21:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Preasumably not The Great Country Houses of Central Europe by Lord Michael Pratt (recently deceased)? -- !! ?? 22:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I think Giano might have added it, I'll wait for him to comment. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You have the correct book but it was only edited by Sitwell, Hobson wrote the chapter concerning Barbaro. Giano 15:56, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Update

OK, I actually have found some verifiable information on some of people that Save venice mentioned in this book. I think it says that an Alessandro and Giovanni Battista Barbaro were descendents of Ermolao Barbaro and were councilman and presidents of the Court of Treviso. Here is a transcription maybe Giano can verify it does say that:

"<<Quella serie luminosissima di eroi, che mentre stanno a decoro dell'Italica, diro meglio, dell'umana famiglia, formano la gloria prima della patria (ossia della citta di Venezia), e l'onorato orgoglio dei nepoti>> In effeti dall'Enciclopedia storico-nobiliare italiana, I, Milano 1928, pp 502-503, risulta che nel 1818 due discendenti di Ermalao Barbaro, Giovanni Battista ed Alessandro Barbaro, divenuto consigliere aulico e presidente del Tribunale di Treviso, mori nel 1846."

I think possibly we should maybe reduce Save venice's block as a lot of the information they have added has turned out to be correct and not a hoax. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Note that information ultimately came from "Enciclopedia Storico Nobiliare Italiana" which does seem to be a reputable reference work. Could anyone in the US/Italy possibly check this as it doesn't seem to be availiable in the UK? Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 23:04, 6 October 2007 (UTC)