DataPacRat: Descended from kings and gods

[DataPacRat]

son of Viscount Alain I "le Noir" de Rohan b1085

I hope this guy existed because he sounds like a total badass.

If he didn't exist, then why does he have a Wikipedia page?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alain_I_de_Rohan

Alain I de Rohan , also known as le Noir (1084 - 1147) was the 1st Viscount de Rohan and Viscount of Castelnoec. He was the third son of Eudon I de Porhoët, viscount of Porhoët, and Emma de Léon (daughter of Guyomarch II, Viscount de Léon).

Life

He receives as his inheritance, the sparsely populated western Porhoët, in 1116. He also owned a castle at Castennec and constructs another on the shores of the Oust which he names Rohan, the name he passes on to his descendants. In 1128, Alain de Rohan finishes constructing his permanent residences and foundsthe Priory de la Coarde at Castennec for the monks at Redon, and a priory for Marmoutier Abbeynear château de Rohan.

[Formless]

son of Viscount Alain I "le Noir" de Rohan b1085

Rohan

Rohan

Coincidence?

[Garibaldi]

Unfortunately that page sheds no light on how he got his awesome appellation.

[Havok]

If he didn't exist, then why does he have a Wikipedia page?

Ok. I take it back. You are just an idiot. :P

[Tiriol]

About actual lineages:

I think that my family tree has been traced back to 15th or 16 century, but at least to 18th century. Mostly peasants, farmers and other low-key characters, with the exception of President Kyösti Kallio (the Finnish President during the Winter War in 1939 - 1940). According to the family lineage, I'm also very distantly related, albeit through a little loop, to Martin Luther (by marriage; his wife is apparently related).

Yeah, not very exciting lineage. But very typically Finnish (with a small dose of German and maybe Swedish ancestry; more German, I think).

[DataPacRat]

If he didn't exist, then why does he have a Wikipedia page?

Ok. I take it back. You are just an idiot. :P

Eh; I've been called worse.

Would you be happier if I'd phrased that, 'why does he have a well-referenced Wikipedia page treating him as a historical figure'?

[Duckie]

No.

You're still an idiot.

[DataPacRat]

No.

You're still an idiot.

Okay, then; how would /you/ write a pithy, somewhat informal sentence about "Le Noir"'s existence compared to the lack thereof, which, given this is an online forum, includes a reference to the top hit when you Google, say, 'alain le noir rohan'?

[Duckie]

I wouldn't, because I'm not stupid enough to think "Geneology sites and Wikipedia claim this man exists = he does". I'd actually look up in a history book whether he did.

[DataPacRat]

I wouldn't, because I'm not stupid enough to think "Geneology sites and Wikipedia claim this man exists = he does". I'd actually look up in a history book whether he did.

Which book? What evidence would you present that the book /actually/ more reliable than Wikipedia? Can you get to it, and post a reference to it, in under a minute or so, which is a generous estimate for the length of time devoted to an off-the-cuff comment about the historicity of a real-world person on a board mainly dedicated to fictional universes?

[Duckie]

I wouldn't, because I'm not stupid enough to think "Geneology sites and Wikipedia claim this man exists = he does". I'd actually look up in a history book whether he did.

Which book? What evidence would you present that the book /actually/ more reliable than Wikipedia? Can you get to it, and post a reference to it, in under a minute or so, which is a generous estimate for the length of time devoted to an off-the-cuff comment about the historicity of a real-world person on a board mainly dedicated to fictional universes?

Are you really this dense? Are you actually going to make an argument that historical records are just as valid as Wikipedia when it comes to determining whether something is true or not? Let alone that we're not arguing about this Breton Noble existing. We're arguing that you're a dumbass who asserted Wikipedia = True.

Also, "Off the cuff." "I didn't think my post through entirely" isn't a good response to "You posted something fucking stupid." Just give it up and move on.

[fgalkin]

So, I was out sick for a few days, I come back, and I find this thread going strong and better than ever!

I wouldn't, because I'm not stupid enough to think "Geneology sites and Wikipedia claim this man exists = he does". I'd actually look up in a history book whether he did.

Which book? What evidence would you present that the book /actually/ more reliable than Wikipedia? Can you get to it, and post a reference to it, in under a minute or so, which is a generous estimate for the length of time devoted to an off-the-cuff comment about the historicity of a real-world person on a board mainly dedicated to fictional universes?

I happen to look at your ancestor, and gues what I found?


What evidence would you present that the book /actually/ more reliable than Wikipedia? Can you get to it, and post a reference to it, in under a minute or so, proving that this person DOES exist and that you are not a moron?

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[The Spartan]

I saw that.

I laughed my ass off.

Rat, Wiki has a page on Zeus, but we know he was fictional. In fact, it has numerous pages on fictional characters, places and things. Worse, it's "user edited" making it suspect, at best. If you can cite a book, basic bibliography will do (author, title, date published), then we'd be far more likely to believe you, hell, it's what I've done when citing one of my textbooks when one of the "9/11 was a hoax" idiots came around saying fire couldn't hurt a steel building without being hot enough to melt the steel. I stated the info and cited the page, textbook name, edition and author.

[Thanas]

The only webpage one should trust on medieval geneology is http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/

And lo and behold, there are indeed some references to the family of Rohan.

[fgalkin]

The only webpage one should trust on medieval geneology is http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/

And lo and behold, there are indeed some references to the family of Rohan.

But, Thanas, Wikipedia disagrees! And according to the gentleman in question, it is as good a source as that, maybe even better!

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[DataPacRat]

I wouldn't, because I'm not stupid enough to think "Geneology sites and Wikipedia claim this man exists = he does". I'd actually look up in a history book whether he did.

Which book? What evidence would you present that the book /actually/ more reliable than Wikipedia? Can you get to it, and post a reference to it, in under a minute or so, which is a generous estimate for the length of time devoted to an off-the-cuff comment about the historicity of a real-world person on a board mainly dedicated to fictional universes?

Are you really this dense? Are you actually going to make an argument that historical records are just as valid as Wikipedia when it comes to determining whether something is true or not? Let alone that we're not arguing about this Breton Noble existing. We're arguing that you're a dumbass who asserted Wikipedia = True.

Also, "Off the cuff." "I didn't think my post through entirely" isn't a good response to "You posted something fucking stupid." Just give it up and move on.

Thank you for presenting a classic example of the strawman argument fallacy (specifically, twisting my words to try to have them imply more than I actually said, which seems to be a common tactic on this board), incorporating a healthy dose of what seems to be an anti-crowdsourcing pseudo-intellectual bias. Given the classic quote, "You can't reason a man out of an argument he didn't reason himself into", I see little-to-no profit from further discussion with you on this topic, unless and until you demonstrate you are not arguing simply for the sake of arguing and the lulz. (If you can tell me what my signature means, that would certainly be a good start; if you wish to take up this challenge, I suggest doing so over PM.)

[DataPacRat]

The only webpage one should trust on medieval geneology is http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/

And lo and behold, there are indeed some references to the family of Rohan.

But, Thanas, Wikipedia disagrees!

Fgalkin, it appears that Wikipedia automagically corrected itself less than 10 minutes after somebody from this board vandalized that entry.

And according to the gentleman in question, it is as good a source as that, maybe even better!

And here we have another example of somebody trying to twist my words to make them say something I didn't. I asked Duckie for his reference, and for evidence that it was better than Wikipedia; I don't see how you can believe that that means that I disparaged the actual reference provided by somebody else in a later post. Given your previous misinterpretations of my posts, I see no reason not to mention that I now feel your posts have precisely the same worth I described for Duckie's.

[fgalkin]

The only webpage one should trust on medieval geneology is http://www.genealogie-mittelalter.de/

And lo and behold, there are indeed some references to the family of Rohan.

But, Thanas, Wikipedia disagrees!

Fgalkin, it appears that Wikipedia automagically corrected itself less than 10 minutes after somebody from this board vandalized that entry.

You mean YOU went back there and fixed it, right?

And according to the gentleman in question, it is as good a source as that, maybe even better!

And here we have another example of somebody trying to twist my words to make them say something I didn't. I asked Duckie for his reference, and for evidence that it was better than Wikipedia; I don't see how you can believe that that means that I disparaged the actual reference provided by somebody else in a later post. Given your previous misinterpretations of my posts, I see no reason not to mention that I now feel your posts have precisely the same worth I described for Duckie's.

What evidence would you present that the book /actually/ more reliable than Wikipedia?

What did you try to say here?

EDIT: Also, please show just why a "anti-crowdsourcing pseudo-intellectual bias" is a bad thing to have.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Duckie]

I like how trusting encyclopedias and actual mediaeval chronicles over wikipedia is "pseudo-intellectual" and "anti-crowdsourcing". While Alain I de Rohan actually exists, the fact that he does is irrelevant. You can make a correct statement purely by accident based on retarded evidence.

Relying on wikipedia for knowledge rather than verifiable, proven sources- or even better, period sources is intellectually lazy. Insisting that a webpage anyone can edit knows more than a dedicated historian or even a mediaeval fucking document from the time period whether a person is real or not is more than that- it's the heights of insanity. But then again, we already know that DataPacRat is insane- he has said that trusting wikipedia less than a history book is "anti-crowdsourcing" and "psuedo-intellectual" rather than just good sense.

And of course he's also said "I don't think I'll argue with you, because you're mean". I'd identify his signature but he doesn't have one and that's also a silly challenge. Although I guess if I could see it maybe his "Identify my signature via PM or I won't talk to you anymore" threat might make more sense in context.

A record of the conversation and how I'm "twisting his words".
Someone: Alain I Le Noir Rohan, if he existed, sounds cool.
DPR: How could he not have existed? He has a wikipedia page.
Havok: You're a dumbass.
DPR: Well, I mean, how could he not have a well-cited wikipedia page?
Duckie: You're a dumbass. Here's two linked examples of well-cited pages about things that don't exist.
DPR: But he did exist!
Duckie: So? Just because Wikipedia is right in this case doesn't mean it's a reliable source of information. I'd rather use a more reliable source such as an encyclopedia, history book, or period document to verify something.
DPR: Prove books are more reliable than Wikipedia.

You didn't say "Prove you have a book that says Alain I does not exist", which I never claimed. You asked me to prove that a webpage that anybody can edit has less veracity than fact-checked and edited encyclopaedias, books written by real experts, or historical records. Which I already did, by showing two of the numerous times something false on wikipedia has fooled people who do not check real encyclopedias, books, or the like.

[Duckie]

Ghetto Edit- Oh, he does. It's something in Tengwar. I don't see what purpose this has to do with anything, nor am I certain he's even using it right (the first bit appears to say 'el ehe eha viihy' or 'le heë heä vhyii' depending upon whether it's Sindarin or Quenya unless I'm horribly mistaken.)

[DataPacRat]

Should anyone be interested in treating my signature as a puzzle and trying to figure it out...

For some reason, no signatures seem to appear in this subforum, but you should be able to see it in any of my posts elsewhere, or by looking at my userinfo, or just by clicking on http://www.datapacrat.com/testo.png

To save you time, the filename in the URL doesn't have any meaning beyond that it took me a little over a dozen tries to get the output format the way I liked. (If anyone asks, I can put up a version of the image with a larger font, for easier readability.)

You should be able to tell when you've gotten the right answer by checking it against this next bit, which doesn't really tell you how to go about /finding/ the answer, but which I'm putting inside spoiler tags for puzzle purists: Spoiler

The last word's definition has to do with a value judgement about something's appearance.

unless I'm horribly mistaken.)

Mm... yes. Yes, I'd have to say that that part of that post is fairly accurate.

[Duckie]

And this is still an irrelevant tangent. If you have something useful to say that's in your signature in the Tengwar, say it. Otherwise stop dodging the point.

[Havok]

Man, you really should have just let this die while you had a few supporters. :lol:

[Ghost Rider]

He either responds to said accusations or fgalkin or another gets to play whack a mole with the rat.

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

Awesome. I'll bring the Ramik and Victors!