Talk:Stefano Černetić

Do not remove. He is not s fake princ by Corte from 2023 yare

Do not remove. He is not s fake princ by Corte from 2023 yare Bajsikus (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC) https://www.ilfattoquotidiano.it/2023/09/06/assolto-il-principe-del-montenegro-stefan-cernetic-lasciapassare-diplomatici-e-timbri-falsi-il-giudice-la-sua-era-semplice-vanteria/7283382/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bajsikus (talk • contribs) 20:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

it doesn't say that he is a Prince, but simply that the law absolved him of the crimes because it deemed him a vain megalomaniac and that saying in public, I am a Prince and making false stamps is not a crime. 2A02:B121:8011:2C9B:9187:1294:1E39:3880 (talk) 08:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PrimalMustelid talk 17:19, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that while pretending to be prince of Montenegro, Italian journalist Stefano Černetić met with royals and made Pamela Anderson a countess? Source: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-stefan-of-montenegro-exposed-as-italian-fraudster-nl3hz0h5d
  https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/15/prince-montenegro-conferred-honour-pamela-anderson-exposed-alleged/
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/LaVonne Griffin-Valade
  • Comment: This is technically like 9 days old, but it was held up at AfD.

Created by BuySomeApples (talk). Self-nominated at 02:27, 20 January 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Stefano Černetić; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

• The DYK is certaily interesting, and the sources cited support the statement. I'm IAR'ing the 9/10 days, given the AfD and the very interesting hook, so no problems there. I can't find the corresponding source and body text for the fact he falsely claimed to be a prince of Macedonia, so that BLP issue needs to be sorted. I'll need to do a further spot-check still for BLP/copyvio. Earwig is clean, QPQ is done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:56, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
• I've done spot checks on four paragraphs, showing good text-source integrity and no copyvio/transvio :). Minor point: What make Wine Spectator a reliable source? This may be subjective, but this seems a bit too close to gossip to me? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:39, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! Ref2 (https://www.rtlnieuws.nl/nieuws/buitenland/artikel/5322041/nepprins-montenegro-djukanovic-cernetic) mentions him claiming to be prince of Macedon, although I think his claim to being prince of Montenegro was the more legally significant since the Montenegrin government is the one that complained. Wine Spectatory is probably reliable because it seems to have editorial standards for its writers/editors (https://www.winespectator.com/articles/about-our-tastings). I can definitely remove it though if you're uncertain, it isn't really an important part of the article and the topic is a bit gossip-y since the winery owner is ultimately the source. BuySomeApples (talk) 00:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please ensure it's clear in the article that RTL Nieuws is the source here. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 14:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

• @BuySomeApples: Please address the above. Z1720 (talk) 02:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

• @Femke and Z1720: The nominator hasn't edited since the 2nd. Should we wait for their return or should the nomination be marked for closure? Narutolovehinata5 (talk · contributions) 07:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

  I've added the citation myself now, as it would be a shame if this is not presented on the main page. So now :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Directly from Stefano Černetić

Dear Sir or Madam, who can Stefano Černetić contact directly to have this article removed or corrected? The article was written with a lot of mistakes and incorrect information that was in the news and tabloids. But especially that information, which goes back far into the past, and since Stefano Černetić proved that he is a noble just recently in Turin, such information is not so widespread and bombastic, therefore it is not widespread. In the spirit of freedom of thought, correctness, objectivity and above all reality and democracy in the free world, please whom should Stegano Četnetić contact?

If it is written about a person, someone should check the credibility of the information, especially since it is a sensitive topic and because it will cause damage to a person and to his family. 178.221.163.251 (talk) 20:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

The short answer is there is no one he can contact to have this article removed. The matter was discussed back in January, and it was an effectively unanimous decision by the community to keep the article.

The slightly longer answer is, please read WP:BLPEDIT, which explains what rights and options the subject of a Wikipedia article may have in relation to that article.

If there are factual errors, objectively speaking, then corrections to those can be requested via this talk page using the {{Edit COI}} template. Such requests must clearly explain what needs to be corrected and how, and be supported with evidence from reliable published sources verifying the requested change.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:55, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Stefano Černetić understands that objectivity is important and wants to share with you the extract of the court's decision in order to give a realistic picture and to make the Wikipedia article objective.

By the way, Stefano Černetić has two sons, please correct that.

This is the link that contains the documentation https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1CLPF9aSVWDyxrnZUkKTKTNhQXXY26xac?usp=drive_link 93.87.51.1 (talk) 09:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, but I will not access anything in someone's Google Drive. In any case, we can only consider reliable, published sources.

Do not reveal unreferenced personal or family details, such as these, on a public web page. I will ask for that comment to be removed from the record.

What I will do, as a compromise solution, is remove details of this person's children from the article, as I don't see them being in any way relevant here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

But then Stefano Černetić does not know how to write in this article in an objective form. Especially since the article starts out as "fraud" and that is not what has been proven in court. Please then write without prejudice and on the basis of the information that was written in the tabloids before the conclusion of the court. 37.19.108.128 (talk) 11:02, 31 May 2024 (UTC)