Talk:Leopold, Duke of Lorraine

Trivia section removed

"Leopold was particularly well equipped for sexual intercourse. The Duke was once taking a bath when the man washing him asked if 'His Grace would move his arm so that I can wash His Grace?' It turned out, that it wasn't his arm that was in the way at all, but, by your leave, quite a different thing.'"

At the age of nineteen, Duke Leopold Joseph married the twenty-two-year old Elisabeth of Orleans. Who, after her honeymoon, told her mother how much she was enjoying the pleasures of the marital bed. The Duke was, as Madame her mother delicately put it, 'excessively taken with this bagatelle."

I have removed the above text, which constituted a section entitled Trivia. It is unreferenced, of dubious historical value, and in its current form merely performs a prurient function. In my opinion it would only be suitable for reinclusion in article if adequate references can be cited, and significance explained.--Iacobus (talk) 01:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

"In 1718, Leopold and his wife visited Paris to attend the marriage of Elisabeth Charlotte's sister Marie Louise Elisabeth to the Duke of Berry, and were among the guest of the lavish banquet at the Palais du Luxembourg.[1] During the visit, Leopold, as a foreign prince, received the style of Royal Highness."

Marie Louis was her niece, daughter of her brother, and descended from Montespan.86.72.133.161 (talk) 14:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Leopold, Duke of Lorraine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080410143741/http://www.xs4all.nl:80/~kvenjb/madmonarchs/marielouise/marielouise_bio.htm to http://www.xs4all.nl/~kvenjb/madmonarchs/marielouise/marielouise_bio.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Talk, to avoid edit warring

Someone keeps erasing my edits. Insisting that a queen and empress is below a duke in rank. They have reverted my edits keeping the spellings consistent and correct throughout the article. Élisabeth should have an accent on the E. The first time the name is mentioned, it has an accent. The other times it does not. The spellings shouldn't change through the article. They have also erased the full name of the daughter, to keep the article readable and less confusing, because she has the exact same name as her mother, Élisabeth Charlotte. They erased the mother of the children so she is not even mentioned, leaving wiki readers with less information. They have erased the correct titles of people, leaving them blank. I don't know what to do because they are threatening me with "edit warring" when they are in fact the one edit warrring. Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 21:14, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

User:DrKay As a compromise, would you rather erase her half-brother entirely, or put it in parentheses so it is easier to read? Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 07:18, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

I see no problem with just writing as one would normally write: Leopold was the son of Charles V, Duke of Lorraine, and his wife Eleonora of Austria, a half-sister of Leopold I, Holy Roman Emperor. DrKay (talk) 07:25, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

It's just as normal to write Eleonora of Austria and her husband Charles V, Duke of Lorraine. There is no rule that the father comes first. Typically, the mother comes first since the child came from her body. One can make an argument for putting the mother first no matter what, based on that. However, that is not what I'm arguing. She is a queen, and significantly higher than him. Royalty can be written before simple nobility. Not only is she not listed first, she doesn't even have a title, queen. Why is a duke titled but her highness is not? Her wikipedia page titles her Eleonore of Austria, Queen of Poland. We have the ranks listed: Imperial, royal and noble ranks. Herzog. Princesses and queens are before regular dukes. Grand dukes may come before prince and princess. Wikipedia already agrees on this, you'd have to change the entire website if you disagree. I'm not only correcting the order, I am adding proper titles that were missing. When a duke is first mentioned, his title duke should be stated, right? I think it's a simple fix that makes certain wiki articles less awkward looking, and creates a consistent rule. For example, the article of Prince Charles reads as "Charles was born... as the first child of Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh, and Philip, Duke of Edinburgh." Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 07:45, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

That's because Charles's titles and rank derive from his mother not his father. Similarly, reigning queens and empresses would usually be listed before their less important consorts. However, that does not apply in this case. The children's rank and titles derive from the father not the mother, who was the widow of an elected king. They inherit no rank or title through her. The usual idiom is to list the duke of Lorraine before his wife. We should follow the same pattern, not confuse readers with an unusual and unexpected idiom. DrKay (talk) 08:05, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

The article title is not relevant. 'Queen of Poland' is added as a disambiguator to distinguish her from the other Eleanors of Austria. DrKay (talk) 08:12, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

So you agree we need to distinguish her? Her title is relevant. She's a QUEEN. Royalty gets titled when they are first mentioned. It is information about the son, who the article is about, that his mother is a queen. You are arguing for taking out relevant info that gives the reader more knowledge. No one is born a queen. How she gained her title queen is irrelevant. You fake rule is inconsistent. You switched many edits where the title derived from the mother. If I change all the articles to list first whoever gave the child the title, will you stop reverting them? Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 03:21, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not talking about her title. I'm talking about the article title, i.e. the page name or web address of her wikipedia biography. It is technically impossible to have two pages of the same name so they have to be disambiguated. You say I "switched many edits where the title derived from the mother". No, I haven't. I've not done that anywhere. DrKay (talk) 17:41, 5 July 2022 (UTC)

DrKaj.... you're basically contradicting yourself all the time, which is the funniest. It's like you're saying that people can't inherit moms' titles. Let's imagine a hypothetical situation, because Idk any real life example - your mom is princess of Finland, and dad is king of England. Her brother becomes king after dad death,but is childless. Now YOUR older brother, first in line becomes a king of England, and you, as the only option, go to your uncles throne, which I'm sure happened thousands of times. And you two brothers are kings of different countries. You can absolutely inherit moms line of ascend AND titles. Why would there even BE titles if you couldn't. Just to appease to "stupid girls' ego"? Like Sasha Baron Cohen says "Girls I college are like chimps in suits. Completely useless, but it's funny to us". Whole your edit and arguments here are very much blatantly and chauvinist sexist (I'm a German man btw). Like women titles are worthless. They are as much as important as any other. And they are in LINE exactly because of those (childless heirs) problems. When retarded men realized that nephews take throne anyways, OR they'll have to give it to a girl ANYHWAYS, they realized they ruined many kingdoms when giving them to some seventh branch retard instead of kings daughter. And no, Duke is not higher than prince (crown heir OR ruler of Principality (for example Miloš Obrenovič, absolutely superimposed to dukes)) Violet Feet (talk) 17:24, 4 July 2022 (UTC)( Blocked sockpuppet of Helpfulwikieditoryay)

I've literally just said, "Charles's titles and rank derive from his mother". Sock puppetry is not a good look, especially since I already asked you whether you had alternate accounts,[1] and you said no.[2][ DrKay (talk) 17:34, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

This isn't my account. Go ahead and report it and see how foolish you look when they discover it's not mine. Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 03:27, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

It's obviously you. You're lucky not to have been blocked as a sock master account. You should be declaring the links between your other, and previous, accounts not denying them. DrKay (talk) 06:56, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

PLEASE report it. Please. I'm literally asking you to report it. You'll discover it's not me and maybe you'll apologize. I don't have any other accounts. I never had an account before this one. I'm starting to suspect you planned in advance to ask me if I had other accounts so you could do this. It was really random and sudden that you asked me to declare other accounts. Is that something you usually ask people? Again, PLEASE report the account so they can do a background check on it. Helpfulwikieditoryay (talk) 03:02, 7 July 2022 (UTC)