Jump to content

Talk:Afonso, Prince of Beira

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

I have a small question. If Afonso is the Prince of Beira, how can he be and Infante? If he is a prince he is not an infante, right? Isn't the tite infante inadequate for the eldest son of the monarch (in this case, pretender)? If you see Felipe, Prince of Asturias his article starts with Don Felipe, Prince of Asturias, while his sister's article starts with The Infanta Elena, Duchess of Lugo. Joaopais 05:10, 2 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Duarte Pio is Royal Prince, because he is the first in the line of succession.
  • Afonso is Infante and is Prince of Beira because he is the second in the line of succesion.

File:Portugal kingdom braganza.gif Nominated for Deletion

[edit]
An image used in this article, File:Portugal kingdom braganza.gif, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Portugal kingdom braganza.gif)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 21:20, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://www.casareal.co.pt/
    Triggered by \bcasareal\.co\.pt\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 18:23, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Describing monarchial ties

[edit]

The Portuguese monarchy was deposed in 1910, a fact I had to look up because this article describes Afonso as a "prince," and as "first in the line of succession to the Portuguese Crown." There is no longer any such monarchy, nor does such a line of succession exist. Does he himself use these titles? Are they recognized in any formal or ceremonial manner? I know that this issue isn't unique to this person; this is just the Wikipedia article I was reading when I thought about it. I think the article should address the actual circumstances of his upbringing--like did his parents have careers outside of being deposed monarchs? Does he fulfil any duties as "prince"? I can try to look into it, but is there any objection to decreasing the article's deference to his supposed titles? --DavidK93 (talk) 01:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 January 2024

[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: not moved. Consensus is that the current title is the COMMONNAME in English. (non-admin closure)  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 19:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Afonso, Prince of Beira → Afonso de Bragança – Portuguese monarchy no longer exists (and hasnt for over 100 years) as User:DavidK93 notes above and Wikipedia should not act as if it does. As per WP:NCROY defunct titles should not be used. D1551D3N7 (talk) 16:16, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - WP:NCROY does not say that defunct titles should not be used, but that they should only be used when they are in common usage (eg. Vittorio Emanuele, Prince of Naples, not Vittorio Emanuele di Savoia). I don't know what the English WP:COMMONNAME is here, but it looks like most cited sources use the proposed name. estar8806 (talk) ★ 17:24, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Against - common usage includes his title. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 20:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: counter proposal that we rename the article to Afonso de Bragança, Prince of Beira, Afonso de Bragança is his full name and keep the current title. Diogo Costa (talk) 17:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Keep the name in line with foreign pages/titles e.g. Name, Followed by Current Title (Afonso, Prince of Beira). Thisismarcelo (talk) 13:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The singular English-language source cannot be said to reflect a "majority" of sources, leaving us to rely on the names used in the broader pool of Portuguese-language sources. There is mixed usage of "Prince of Beira" vs "de Bragança," and the usage of "Prince of Beira" comes mainly from sources associated directly with the Braganças. In my opinion, this fails to clear the deliberately high bar set by WP:NCROY to justify the use of a defunct title. --DavidK93 (talk) 09:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:NCROY dedicates a section to the simple directive, "Do not use hypothetical, dissolved or defunct titles, including pretenders (real or hypothetical), unless this is what the majority of reliable sources use." Notably, it says "reliable sources," which includes non-English sources. Other parts of the guideline make specific reference to English-language usage, and this passage explicitly does not. The singular proposed English-language source, Us Magazine, is not actually cited in the article, and for good reason; an article based on it would read, in its entirety, "Afonso, Prince of Beira (fl. May 4, 2023), is one of the hottest male royals and princes globally and is unmarried." Looking at the other sources, everything that looks like a mainstream or traditional news source calls him "Afonso de Bragança." References to "Prince of Beira" come either directly from the Braganças themselves (on their social media, or in reporting that repeats the proper name "Prince of Beira Prize" that the Braganças themselves gave to the prize they endowed) or from various royalist organizations. It's clear to me that the sources using "Prince of Beira" do not constitute "a majority of reliable sources," but rather a biased grouping of sources that are poorer sources than those using "de Bragança." --DavidK93 (talk) 09:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose: In line with other translated pages of pretenders, keep "Afonso, Prince of Beira", as a way of keeping coherence. If you change this "title" here, you will have to change everyone else that is a pretender. So, therefore, due to Afonso being known as "Prince of Beira" abroad, I propose that the name remains unchanged. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 09:57, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose: Second counter argument (and continuation of above): If you change the name here, you will have to change all the other world pretenders names that have e.g."name", followed by "current title in pretense". Therefore, for the sake of not discriminating one person over the other, I propose to keep things as they are. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 10:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The default position from WP:NCROY is to not use defunct titles "unless this is what the majority of reliable sources use."
    Arguing that other pages have these titles in the title is a weak argument for why this specific page should have the defunct title in the title.
    Why should this article keep the defunct title? He was never in his lifetime a pretender for an existing throne in which case things would be different. D1551D3N7 (talk) 12:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Support: He was never in his lifetime a pretender for an existing throne in which case things would be different
    Support the above sentence, as he was not someone like Crown Prince Pavlos of Greece, who was CP for a time until the monarchy was abolished.
    However
    Oppose: I do still oppose on the fact that we cannot discriminate someone. If the change is intended, then, in my view, I propose that all pages should be updated, to unsure fairness and equality, even if the person themselves are known colloquially by that title. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 13:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think you are misunderstanding how to format your participation in this discussion. Please see Wikipedia:Requested moves#Commenting on a requested move. Exactly once, you should embolden your position on the proposal, normally "Support" or "Oppose." All further discussion should take place in bulleted lines using the normal threading and indenting rules, and you should not use the emboldened keywords "support" and "oppose" to address the threaded conversation. (ETA: The guideline says to use bullets, but the newer "reply" tool does not use them.) If the conversation leads you to actually change your mind about the proposal, you should strikethrough and rewrite your original statement as needed, i.e., OpposeSupport. Currently, you have five emboldened stances (plus a "however"). DavidK93 (talk) 15:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    And to address the substance of your comment, nobody is "discriminating against" anyone. For people who claim royal titles that are not clearly and unambiguously acknowledged by a recognized and functioning monarchy, i.e., pretenders, we go by what reliable sources call them. Some people will be called by the title they claim, and others will not. We cite what the sources say. When individuals make claims about themselves that are unsupported or contradicted by reliable sources, we are not discriminating against them when we fail to uncritically repeat their claims. DavidK93 (talk) 16:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    We don't "have" to do anything to "everyone else that is a pretender," because improving one article never requires that other articles be changed. (Wikipedia:OTHERCONTENT) Besides which, the proposed change applies only to this article because it is based on an assessment of reliable sources on this topic. Every article about a pretender should be titled based on an assessment of reliable sources on that article's topic. If other pretenders' article titles reflect their pretense title while reliable sources don't use it, then yes those articles also ought to be retitled; but applying the standard to this article does not require that anyone involved in this discussion work on applying the standard to any other article. Nor would all articles about pretenders be required to change their titles, even if we did the work of applying this standard; for example, the article Princess Maria Teresa of Bourbon-Parma should probably not be retitled, because reliable reporting on her death pretty consistently used that title, which is based on her descent from the rulers of the Duchy of Parma, which was abolished upon Italian unification in 1859, the better part of a century before she was born. But the sources call her by the title, so that's the correct article title. DavidK93 (talk) 16:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 13:01, 11 February 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.

Usage of "Pretender" infobox rather than "Royalty"one

[edit]

Afonso is a pretender via the Miguelist Branch of House Braganza and claimant to several defunct titles. As such, I propose the usage of the "Infobox Pretender" and not the "Infobox Royalty". There is no royalty in Portugal, however, there is the understanding that if Portugal were to choose to become a monarchy, Afonso and his family would be highly considered to be the Portuguese royal family and assume the claimed titles. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox pretender appears to be specifically for people who are claimants, not all members of a defunct royal family. The subject of this article will only become the claimant to the former Portuguese throne upon the death of his father. 170.76.231.175 (talk) 17:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't answer the point. He is still not royal. Therefore, and being in the line of succession, to a possible restauration of the monarchy, and in the case of his father death, he would be a pretender. He is a claimant to the title of "Infanta of Portugal" and "Prince of Beira", the later being included in this page title. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 18:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
He would be a pretender when his father dies, but his father is still alive, so that would seem to go against the Wikipedia:Crystal Ball policy. 170.76.231.175 (talk) 19:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So what is the argument in favour of the "infobox royalty"? Please clarify. He is not a royal, and according to you not a pretender. So what suggestions do you offer?
He is a pretender, because he is in the "line of succession". Otherwise, there would only be one person claiming/in the line of succession, and this is not how lines of succession works. So, assuming that Portugal was a monarchy, there would be a line with several people on it. Therefore, the same should apply to this case of claimants, because those individuals (in the claimed lines) would be considered to be royals. GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 19:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox parameters include “Throne(s) claimed”. He is currently not claiming a throne, his father is. When his father dies, then it can be said that he’s claiming a throne, but until that happens, it doesn’t seem accurate to list him as such. It may be true that the royalty template might not be accurate in this case, but I’m not sure the pretender template, as currently defined, would be accurate either. As pointed out elsewhere, there are many other people in a similar position in being members of a non reigning royal family without being the head, so some consistency should be worked out in how what infobox should be used, as brought up in the wiki project talk page. 170.76.231.175 (talk) 21:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support:a sensible comment. What are the options for the "Pretender box" then? (for those not claiming the throne, but claiming other titles/and or a place in the line of succession) GrandDukeMarcelo (talk) 21:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Afonso,_Prince_of_Beira&oldid=1257435865"