Talk:Elizabeth Charlotte, Madame Palatine

Biography: Arts and Entertainment / Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as Low-importance).

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

France High‑importance

	France portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FranceWikipedia:WikiProject FranceTemplate:WikiProject FranceFrance
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

European history

	Europe portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women writers Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 31 August 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Elizabeth Charlotte, Duchess of Orleans. The result of the discussion was not moved.

First lady

"...she became known as the First Lady of the Kingdom" Is this good history? Or an Americanization of her position? And do we really mean "costumes" instead of "customs"? --Wetman 29 June 2005 18:24 (UTC)

This is quite right. I believe the user who wrote that meant to say "customs". As for First Lady, I don't know who wrote that. What's true is that when her son became regent her position in France increased a lot. She had sort of fallen out of favor at the court of Versailles. Louis XIV did not talk to her anymore, she was not in the inner circle of the king anymore, and so courtiers considered her sort of fallen from rank. But when her son became regent she found herself at the center of all attentions again. A comeback in the limelight in her old age... although she had no influence on her son's policies. She writes about that unexpected comeback in her letters, with a lot of humour and irony. If I remember correctly, during the Regency the regent paid her visit everyday. She was living in Paris, but I can't remember where. Whether she received an informal title or not, I don't know. Première Dame du Royaume? I don't know if she was ever called that way during the Regency, although this is not totally impossible. Before the Regency, she was known as "Madame", become she was the wife of "Monsieur", the brother of the king. In Louis XIV's days, a courtier asking another courtier: "Savez-vous comment se porte Madame?" would have been specifically understood as inquiring about the Princess Palatine's health. During the Regency, I don't know if she was still called Madame. Hardouin 2 July 2005 20:17 (UTC)

Why not just put most of that right into the article? Much more evocative and accurate a representation of her position. How does does Saint-Simon style her? Was she still simply "Madame" as a widow? We may follow his usage and never err. --Wetman

No one else was going to, so I deleted this. Première Dame de France: that would be the title. A fantasy. --Wetman 05:13, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Titles

A brief comment: the duchy of Montpensier by no means passed to Liselotte by inheritance. This should be investigated. Her husband Monsieur was La Grande Mademoiselle's heir (one of them).

As for the other discussion thread, I would only add that Madame did signify roughly First Lady of the kingdom, but implied that this was one step down from the Queen. After 1682 the Queen was dead, and the Dauphine became the primary woman at court. After 1690 she too was dead and so Madame was indeed the first lady at the court in terms of rank, until 1697 when the Duchesse de Bourgogne arrived.

Agreed that Elisabeth Charlotte did not inherit the dukedom or revenues of the duchy of Montpensier, but the article's text claims, rather, that she was the heiress of the duchesse de Montpensier. But I don't see how that is possible either, as she was only very distantly related to La Grande Mademoiselle, who had several younger half-sisters. It is, of course, possible that the revenues of Liselotte's household as a dowager were paid out of her late husband's inheritance from La Grande Mademoiselle, but that would have been an administrative detail hardly worth noting.

I disagree that the title "Madame" implied first lady of the court in any sense except, now and then, coincidentally. In fact, this Madame never enjoyed that position. The title simply meant "wife of the King's eldest brother". True, she should have ranked as la première dame between 1690 and 1697, but did not becaue the King's morganatic wife, madame de Maintenon, held that position de facto. In fact, IIRC, Madame was so offended by the elevation of "a former governess" to the rank of France's first lady that she dared refuse La Maintenon's offer of an armchair when she was obliged to pay her a visit, since in the proper scheme of things Mme de Maintenon should not have even been allowed to sit in the presence of Madame at all!

Finally, the title "Princess Palatine", while commonly accorded in France to Elisabeth Charlotte during her betrothal was not used in that form, and was not used after her marriage. The reason is quite simple: "The Princess Palatine" was, in France, the title accorded to Anna Gonzaga (1616-84, of the French Nevers branch of the Dukes of Mantua), wife of Liselotte's uncle, the Prince Palatine Edward. This aunt, a famous Parisian hostess, conceived and negotiated Liselotte's 1671 marriage to Monsieur and was the couple's close friend in France umtil her death. Usually, therefore, prior to her marriage Liselotte was referred to in France as "the Princess Palatine Elisabeth Charlotte", and after marriage as "Madame" (the style, once obtained, was retained for life, like the title Princess Royal in Britain; even if a new king acceded to the throne, his sister-in-law could not become Madame until the previous one died, although during the lifetime of Liselotte, no one else ever qualified for her style). Lethiere 20:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better title

I think there has to be a better title for this article. Liselotte was not the Princess of anything, let alone of a county palatine. Princess Palatine Elizabeth Charlotte might be better or even Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate. Charles 17:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the simplest way to correct the implication that she was "the" Princess Palatine, is to use it as a prefix rather than a suffix to her Christian name. But "Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" is the clearest style, and is less inaccurate by avoiding a title. Her legal pre-marital title was "Countess Palatine Elizabeth Charlotte (at Simmern)" but this title was considered insultingly inadequate even before her marriage, because she was the daughter of one of the five hereditary Prince Electors of the Empire, the highest-ranking princes in Europe below emperors and kings. The difficulty is that "elector" is the holder of an hereditary office, rather than of an hereditary title: children of an elector did not, properly, derive any title or rank from the paternal position (that's why the Holy Roman Emperor's children were not "Imperial Highness"). Informally, she and others in her position were sometimes called "Electoral Princess of the Palatinate (Kurprinzessin von der Ffalz"), but this title is little-known outside of German history books. I thought that the latest decision is that the "most common name used in English" must be used, regardless of the naming conventions worked out with royalty specifically in mind. By that standard, she should simply be listed at "Madame" ("Madam" if all titles are to be translated into English), or at her marital rather than maiden name, "Elizabeth Charlotte, Duchess of Orleans". She was and is better known in English by either of those titles than by her pre-marital title. Lethiere 20:07, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comprehensive reply, Lethiere. There is still much debate (and indeed, reverting) about moves to marital names when the naming conventions prescribe something else. Indeed, you raised the point why I asked, the fact that the name "(Countess Palatine) Elizabeth Charlotte of Simmern" is basically unknown to all but a few hardcore genealogical purists. If the "spirit" of this name is to be preserved, I would make a move for Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate, at least until naming conventions change (if they do). Given that, I will start a RM now and see how it goes. Charles 01:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess Palatine → Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate — The current name for Liselotte is in a form which is almost always prescribed for individuals holding substantive titles or titles in their own right. Liselotte, however, was not one of these people, nor was she a princess in the sense of holding it as a title. The daughter of an elector, her father held a hereditary position and used the territorial designation of his reigning title, Count Palatine of the Rhine, that is, the Palatinate of the Rhine. Thus, Liselotte could be described as of the Rhine, of the Palatinate or of Simmern, the name of her line of the House of Wittelsbach. The designation of the Palatinate, however, is the most common one for her. —Charles 01:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Survey

Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *'''Support''' or *'''Oppose''', then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

Support As nominator and for reasons given above. Charles 01:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Charles has changed his original requested move from "Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess Palatine" → "Elisabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" TO "Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess Palatine" → "Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" (thus making some of my comments difficult to understand). Noel S McFerran 04:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize, but you can understand that it is in the best interest of the move given your comments about S vs Z. Charles 05:19, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Charles is a brave man for trying to determine a name for this individual. Here are the numbers from Google Books. Please note that there are FOUR forms of the name which receive more hits than the one suggested by Charles; I do not know how he has determined that this "is the most common one for her" (when it clearly isn't).

62 "Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" [1]

25 "Elisabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" [2] the form suggested by Charles

5 "Charlotte Elizabeth of the Palatinate" [3]

1 "Charlotte Elisabeth of the Palatinate" [4]

72 "Charlotte Elizabeth Princess Palatine" [5]

47 "Elizabeth Charlotte Princess Palatine" [6]

32 "Elisabeth Charlotte Princess Palatine" [7]

4 "Charlotte Elisabeth Princess Palatine" [8]

186 "Elizabeth Charlotte" "Princess Palatine" [9]

156 "Charlotte Elizabeth" "Princess Palatine" [10]

77 "Elisabeth Charlotte" "Princess Palatine" [11]

91 "Charlotte Elisabeth" "Princess Palatine" [12]

There is an overwhelming majority favouring the letter Z in the name Elizabeth/Elisabeth. I do not know why Charles suggests a change to the letter S when it is in such a small minority.

There is also a majority (although not an overwhelming one) which favours the usage "Princess Palatine". The maiden name used most frequently is "Charlotte Elizabeth Princess Palatine".

Of course, the name by which this lady is most frequently known is actually her married name "Elizabeth Charlotte Duchess of Orleans". [13] Noel S McFerran 01:54, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry about the s, it was really an automatic thing in my head to write. As for the most common name, I do wish that it didn't seem as if you were trying to speak for me. I never said "Elisabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" was the most common name for her, I said that of designations, the Palatinate is more common than of the Rhine or of Simmern. Perhaps the distinction was not clear enough. The naming conventions for royalty do not support this name as was the case cited for the RM of Queen Victoria (that being the most common name, which I supported in principle, but in violation of WP:NC(NT)). Names which people are called and titles which they are accorded seem to differ though and this is the same for Liselotte. "Princess Palatine" shows less following her name (as in the current title) than the form Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate. The fact that they show in stronger numbers separate from one another certainly warrants use throughout the article, but it wouldn't be supported much in my opinion unless the article was simply called "Princess Palatine", which it would not be. Charles 02:04, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed the nomination to the "z" form. Charles 03:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps Charles can give some justification for promoting the form "[name] of the Palatinate" instead of "[name], Princess Palatine". The Google Books results for the four forms of "[name] of the Palatinate" total 93 hits; the results for the four forms of "[name], Princess Palatine" total 155 hits (with even more if one just looks for "Princess Palatine" and the name separately). Why should Wikipedia stray from the dominant form used in scholarly literature? Noel S McFerran 03:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the same reasons Wikipedia refused to use the dominant form used in scholarly literature for Queen Victoria, perhaps. As it stands, it is not a name prescribed by the naming conventions. Perhaps the order of the names used in English ought to be taken into account as well. A majority use "Elizabeth Charlotte" and "Elisabeth Charlotte" and a majority of those do not append "Princess Palatine" directly after her name as we do here on Wikipedia. Taking into account that the forms "X Y" and "X" "Y" were searched, but not "X" "Y" - "XY", a majority still does not use the form with the title immediately following the name. It is more of a nickname or an assumed title than anything official. Charles 03:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why should Wikipedia use the form "Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate" (62 Google Books hits) instead of the form "Charlotte Elizabeth, Princess Palatine" (72 Google Books hits)? I have shown fairly clearly that "Princess Palatine" is used for this lady significantly more often than "of the Palatinate". Noel S McFerran 04:38, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For the reasons that I have already posted, Noel. Charlotte as the second name is more common than Charlotte as the first name and for either form far less have the title appended immediately after the name, which also goes against the naming conventions. Charles 05:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose From Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_(names_and_titles)#Past_royal_consorts :Where the name by itself is unambiguous or primary usage, it is pedantry to insist on this form against usage: Marie Antoinette, not Marie Antoinette of Austria.

"princess palatine" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia: 1100 ghits
"princess of the palatinate" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia : 7 ghits

"princess palatine" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia 641 google books hits
"princess of the palatinate" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia: 15 google books hit

"princess palatine" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia: 48 google scholar hits
"princess of the palatinate" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia: 1 google scholar hit. --victor falk 11:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The form in which you have posted those search results is misleading. I was not suggesting appending "Princess of the Palatinate" to the end of her name. I was suggesting "of the Palatinate". Charles 16:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The common name, on a parallel with Marie Antoinette, would be Elisabeth, Duchess of Orleans, like Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire. (Our actual location for the last includes Cavendish, as a gesture of disambiguation, but let's not get into that here; I would, on the whole, oppose including Bourbon.) I'm not sure which way I incline between the two odd choices presently on offer. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:07, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The naming conventions as they are won't go for marital titles. Also, this title currently is in the form of a substantive title, which she did not hold. Charles 16:59, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If this is to me, please explain further. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 02:46, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Current Wiki practice seemingly is to avoid marital titles for women and substantive titles as well (duchess of Orléans is one and Princess Palatine is in the form of one) unless they hold those titles in their own right. Sometimes I agree with it, sometimes I don't, but that is how it has been for some time now. Charles 17:15, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That practice applies only for the wives of ruling princes, not for wives of the nobility (which is why the Duchess of Devonshire is á propos). Philip of Orleans was not a sovereign (whether he was a queen is another subject ;->). Septentrionalis PMAnderson 19:07, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Mr Anderson, you're a dangerous fellow ;) As for Wiki practice, I was under the impression that there was a whole different "group" dedicated to the British peerage, or at least different standards. Charles 21:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the bad links, one of the searches I made by mistake was "princess of the palatine"; at least I didn't copypaste that one (:..

Still rather unimpressing.--victor falk 04:53, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, misleading, as I have noted above. Try searching "Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess Palatine" or "Charlotte Elizabeth, Princess Palatine" instead of separating the title from the name.

"(elizabeth|charlotte) princess palatine" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia on Google: 73 hits (~1140 less than just the title, as it is only an informal title)

"(elizabeth|charlotte) princess palatine" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia on Books: 86 hits (~560 less than just the title, as it is only an informal title)

"(elizabeth|charlotte) princess palatine" (leibniz|orleans|montpensier) -wikipedia on Scholar 6 hits (~42 less than just the title, as it is only an informal title)

"(elizabeth AND OR charlotte), "princess palatine" is rather constricted, and will be used mostly when introducing her. In the text she will be referred as "Princess Palatine", when not calling her by just herfirst name ("then the Princess Palatine became Leibniz' pen pale, and they sent each other lots of sweet Rabu Retaas and blah blah blah" ). So no, I don't think it's misleading. Furthermore, even if correct, you search still show an advantage for Princess Palatine. Though, with such a small statistical sample, it becomes doubtful it proves anything, as the margin of error can become to wide and renders the Hated Google Test inconclusive, resulting at best in a tie for "of the palatinate". -victor falk 18:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, current naming conventions, which were followed in blocking a move of Victoria of the United Kingdom to Queen Victoria (that being a solidly common name), state under "Other Royals": 4. Where they have no substantive title, use the form "{title} {name} of {country}," e.g., Princess Irene of Greece. Use only the highest prefix title the person ever held. Deceased royal consorts should not have a title mentioned, e.g., Anne of Denmark. Using royal titles for more junior royals will enable users to distinguish between royal consorts and others. A prefix title can be used only when it was held and used by the person. This means that roughly before the 17th century, prince/ss would not be prefixed automatically. Liselotte did not have a pre-marital substantive title and the title "princess" was not quite defined. Princess Palatine is a style, given in the form of a substantive title, and neither follow the naming conventions for royalty. Charles 17:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Saying the move was blocked is rather misleading (I'd rather avoid the bolding, it's a bit impolite in my opinion, but since it's being done here...), as the result was "No consensus". I see your WP:NC(NT) with a WP:IAR and raise you a WP:CCC. Please read WP:NC(NT)'s nutshell. Do notice "common sense" and the "occasional excetption" -victor falk 18:04, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It was requested that this article be renamed but there was no consensus for it to be moved. (Nobody wants Liselotte then?) Angus McLellan (Talk) 10:02, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Please note the conversation on this page just above this RM between Lethiere and me. Charles 01:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in mind that the desired target, Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate, already contains a biography about the mother of the Great Elector. While comparing names, be sure to differentiate between the individuals. Olessi 02:51, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would be more than happy to help disambiguate in the case of a move. As it is, Liselotte is much more famous through her letters recording French court life than the Duchess of Prussia and Electress of Brandenburg. The Duchess-Electress can be disambiguated with her birth and death dates. Charles 02:55, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that Charles has unilaterally moved the older lady to Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate (1597-1660). Noel S McFerran 03:45, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Inspired character?

I came across this character while looking up a fictional character's full name Charlotte Orléans, also part of a french royal family in an anime. Do you guys think this person may have inspired this character? Tyciol (talk) 04:55, 4 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Extranea on granddaughter

This article is not about the Duchesss of Berry. The morality, children & deaths of her other grandchildren aren't recited in Elisabeth Charlotte's article, but in their own articles. That's where this info belongs, properly sourced. FactStraight (talk) 22:08, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My edit is properly sourced but obviously you don't read French ! If you'd read the Letters of the Princess Palatine you'd see how this death which you keep reverting affected her...Aerecinski — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aerecinski (talk • contribs) 21:37, 9 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This woman had 21 grandchildren and I daresay most grandmothers grieve the death of a grandchild -- but that doesn't make it encyclopedic information, nor justify inclusion of the details of one grandchild's death but not those of the other 20. FactStraight (talk) 01:43, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you serious ??? This comment is incredibly silly and shows clearly that you never read the letters of the Palatine and know very little about the French Regency. The death of the Duchess of Berry, the Regent eldest daughter and the leading character of the early Regency was an important event, especially considering the Princess Palatine old age. The "details" of Berry's death are well described by Saint-Simon, a very serious autor, and our main historical source for the period, who found the shameful "details" of Berry's death important enough to dedicate them an entire chapter of his work. The Palatine also gave it importance, at least in the German and French editions of her Letters. The few lines introducing this event in the Palatine biography are entirely justified. Encyclopedic information does not mean distorting the facts and reducing them to the generic type of royal families hagiography you seem to be fond of. Aerecinski — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aerecinski (talk • contribs) 22:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Elizabeth Charlotte, Madame Palatine/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This article needs to be developed further. Citations show a good start, but can be expanded with more appropriate sources -- particularly primary sources. --E. Lighthart (talk) 21:36, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Substituted at 18:01, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 1 October 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. No opposition. (non-admin closure) TonyBallioni (talk) 18:21, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Charlotte, Princess of the Palatinate → Elizabeth Charlotte, Madame Palatine – As can be seen from https://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82138853/ and http://www.isni.org/isni/0000000120304376, there are a great many names in use for this woman, and there are other women called Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate and Elizabeth Charlotte d'Orléans. "Madame Palatine" has the advantage over other disambiguators because it is specific for this woman as well as one of the more commonly used names for her [14]. "Princess of the Palatinate" is not a substantive title. DrKay (talk) 10:53, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Elizabeth Charlotte, Madame Palatine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080511165855/http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/liselot.html to http://home.infionline.net/~ddisse/liselot.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple grammatical mistakes and broken-link references

On reading this page I found many issues:

1- Language about Madame de Maintenon is not neutral

Liselotte couldn't accept the social position and the lust for power of this woman
under the influence of the bigoted Madame de Maintenon

2- Other mistakes

“the King and the Maintenon found out about this and this, of course, had an adverse effect on Liselotte's once good contact with Ludwig” Ludwig who?

3- Grammatical mistakes

after his mother leave the court to become a nun
whom she increasingly controlled him
At the instigation of the Maintenon
he became from a former philanderer

There are others and also many were corrected by other users over the last months. All the problematic sentences seem to be around pieces of text quoted from a book in German by Dirk Van der Cruysse (I don’t know German). It's also weird that I tried several footnotes randomly and they were all broken links.

I'm happy to correct the grammatical mistakes, but before I did, wanted to ask if this is the best course of action especially given the unneutral language. Egwazna (talk) 17:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Style, sourcing and translation

I just went through and corrected much of the grammar and spelling errors and attempted to fix some stylistic issues but I still think the entire page is excessively detailed and feels overly subjective in tone. I would attempt to fix it myself, but I'm still unfamiliar with Wikipedia's preferred stylistic guidelines.

As Egwazna noted above, many sentences appear to be taken from a single German biography and come across as biased, and many of the links are broken. As well, the direct quotes pulled from her letters appear to have been originally written in French or German and poorly translated into English. I haven't touched those, as I am afraid of altering the original meaning. I think this page would benefit from a German speaker finding the references by Dirk Van der Cruysse (Madame sein ist ein ellendes Handwerck) and Helmuth Kiesel (Briefe der Liselotte von der Pfalz) and re-sourcing and re-translating the information.Asiaperdue (talk) 05:12, 25 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The 1673 date for the painting Elisabeth Charlotte, Duchesse d'Orléans, in hunting dress by Elle the Elder

This painting is listed with the date 1673, however from the fashion style of this painting, I would say 1683 would be more accurate. Two factors especially point to this. First, the large size and number of the ribbon loops under the neck, Second, the style of the wig with its middle part also more point to the 1680s. ElkandAcquerne (talk) 16:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 31 August 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. – robertsky (talk) 20:36, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Charlotte, Madame Palatine → Elizabeth Charlotte, Duchess of Orleans – There is no historical or modern basis for this figure to bear the title of "Madame Palatine". As the wife of the King's eldest brother, yes, she indeed was known as "Madame"; but (1) this was not an actual title, merely a form of address, and (2) it was never combined with the word "Palatine". Her official title was Duchess of Orleans. As such, I request that this article be renamed to Elizabeth Charlotte, Duchess of Orelans. Her birth title is also possible - but there another Elizabeth Charlotte of the Palatinate, so Duchess of Orleans would be more descriptive. Regardless, either style would be a huge improvement over the ahistorical and crudely made-up "Madame Palatine". FiveBy21 (talk) 23:09, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. As can be seen from https://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n82138853/ and http://www.isni.org/isni/0000000120304376, there are a great many names in use for this woman, but the proposed target is not one of those used in the English language. "Madame Palatine" is used, however. There is no benefit in moving from a common, recognizable name to an uncommon, unrecognizable one. DrKay (talk) 08:05, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. See Wikipedia:Article titles, "article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources." Celia Homeford (talk) 14:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:27, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, as per previous comments. Somej (talk) 09:04, 7 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.