Wikipedia nonsense - County of Fürstenberg

https://www.google.com/search?q=f%C3%BCrstenberg+county

First hit:

Fürstenberg (principality) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fürstenberg_(principality)‎
Fürstenberg was a county (German: Graftschaft) of the Holy Roman Empire 
in Swabia, present-day southern Baden-Württemberg, Germany.

In the Infobox of the article it says: 1218–1408

This is Wikipedia-nonsense. The first line of the article claims Fürstenberg was a county. But the article title contains the word "principality". But a county is not a principality and more specifically before 1408 there was no principality of Fürstenberg in the Swabian Circle.

Only in 1664 one line of the counts was elevated to the status of "prince"

https://www.google.com/search?q=1664+Reichsf%C3%BCrstenstand+F%C3%BCrstenberg

History

The article used to be called "Fürstenberg (state)" but since there are different entities called Fürstenberg that were a state, it was suggested 2011-01-19 to rename it to "Fürstenberg (county)", which followed the intro line at that time that read

The County of Fürstenberg was a county of the Holy Roman Empire in Swabia,
present-day southern Baden-Württemberg, Germany.

Idiots jumped in, hijack the move proposal, and renamed the article to "principality".

Why? User:Victor_falk wrote /Later elevated noble families like the Fürstenberg, Liechtenstein or Thurn und Taxis dynasties subsequently began to refer to their territory as a "principality" and assumed the awarded rank of a Prince (Fürst) as a hereditary title./

No proof given, that this happened anytime between 1218–1408.

User:Orderinchaos supports this nonsense with " per Victor above - makes the most sense here - we have to be careful re WP:OR, and that one can at least be verified" - Wao. In fact exactly the other way around. It could not be verified and is OR.

Heise

This case made it to Heise Forum and no matter what the facts are:

User Seigneur at http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Das-groesste-Eigentor/forum-276507/msg-24937810/read/ talks about an entity that in 1664 (Wikipedia quote 1) or 1667 (Wikipedia quote 2) became a principality. So he shows only more nonsense. But that is completely irrelevant, since the article in question has a time span tag with an end time before that.
User Gibbon at http://www.heise.de/newsticker/foren/S-Re-Qualitaet-liefern-und-auf-Algorithmen-und-Menschen-vertrauen/forum-276507/msg-24937815/read/ writes: "Dein Link ist hier der einzige Blödsinn."