Talk:Charles II of Navarre

Map

I'd like a map of his posssessions. --Error 11:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

"the bad"

Shouldn't the lede include an explanation of why Charles is the "the bad"? He was no nice guy, he doesn't seem to have done anything so outstandingly bad as to earn this nickname. I assume it is because he was the principle rival of French King John the Good. Kauffner (talk) 05:51, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

In Swedish it's rendered as "Carl the Evil" (probably following German which would be Karl der Böse). One notch better! ;) And no, it was certainly not because of the rough way he put down the uprising. Strausszek (talk) 12:13, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, he is nicknamed "the bad" because of his failures during his mandate. He lost his rights to the French throne, all his territories and left Navarre quite weakened after his death. He was not particularly "Evil", on the contrary, he seemed to be a "fine fellow" for a King of that time, but he just couldn't be trusted by other Kingdoms. He changed allies very frequently, not paying attention to his advisers, such as Symon d'Escorssi, who had to travel quite a lot between France, Castille and Aragon to fix matters with those Kingdoms...Hope this is useful...Achaya — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.159.78.201 (talk) 15:15, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

This is how he is introduced in a book I read, relating to when he makes his break during the jacquerie: "The terrified nobles had finally found themselves a leader in the person of Carl the Evil, politically a dangerous and devious adversary of royal power." ;) Strausszek (talk) 00:54, 15 May 2013 (UTC)

It is interesting to note that in most of the documents from the Kingdom of Navarre during his reign (Comptos documents), he is also addressed as Charles II of Navarre, known as "The Mauvre". So, he was nicknamed during his lifetime, and he knew about it... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.99.242.20 (talk) 22:22, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Leading section

"Accidentally burned alive" better summarizes the person's death than a vague term "horrible", which is what the leading section should do.

@Kansas Bear: Please stop disruptive behaviour. --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 02:35, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

FYI, he was not burned to death in 1837. You were the one being disruptive. Maybe you should learn to read what you are writing. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:36, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

It's a typo only ocurring in the second edit. Are you trying to slander me with that by stating that I wanted to say the person died in 1837? That's the most disruptive behaviour above all. --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 02:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

WRONG! You did this edit twice!17:14, 1 November 202102:13, 2 November 2021 Which resulted in a warning, which you then trolled my talk page, three times. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:41, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

It's still a typo. And it is corrected now. Why didn't you correct it in the first place, which can be no more easy, rather than attack and harass me? Don't you even know Wikipedia:Assume good faith before picking a fight on my talk page? Again, please stop disruptive behaviour. --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 02:49, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

And you need to check your own work. Again, please stop disruptive behavior and harassment or an Admin will be notified. Thank you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 02:54, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

As is shown above, the whole trouble was caused by your aggression, especially rude reverts and false accusation of "disruptive behavious" when you know very well it is only a typo. You need to learn how to behave yourself properly on Wikipedia. --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 03:06, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Wrong again. You need to check your own editing. It is not anyone else's job. You added incorrect information twice and received a warning, then you got all upset and decided to troll my talk page, not once, but three times. Go do something productive.

• "You need to learn how to behave yourself properly on Wikipedia."

Grow up. Get over it. Move on. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:13, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Wrong, as is shown above, the whole trouble was caused by your combative behaviour. Whether I missed my typo is one thing. Your using it to fuel a conflict is another, irrelevant. --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 03:20, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

In addition, trying to cover up my questions to your problematic behaviour on your talk page and calling it "trolling" is acctually even more embarrassing than your doings in this page, which might be against your will. --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 03:28, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Wrong, again. You can not edit properly as shown by the broken English you added;

• "His burned alive accidentally in 1387."

You should worry more about your inability to write proper English. There is a thing called, Wikipedia:Competence is required.

• "Your using it to fuel a conflict is another"

No, you turned it into a conflict, by your continued inability to understand any of this. Drop it and move on.

• "trying to cover up my questions to your problematic behaviour on your talk page"

And this explains why you are struggling with your writing skills.....

• "embarrassing than your doings in this page..."

You mean your continued whining? Get over it. --Kansas Bear (talk) 03:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. you seemingly just provided yourself as a good example of “continued whining without getting over it” and "your continued inability to understand WP:DROPTHESTICK". --by Huhu9001 (talk) at 03:45, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Family tree

Wouldn’t it be nice to also show on the family tree Charles’ wife, Joan of France, since she’s the daughter of John II of France ? I feel like she could fit into the tree quite easily, if someone knows how to code it :) FrenchieWolf (talk) 23:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)