Jump to content

User talk:Piratesswoop/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

T:DYK.

Updated DYK query On 6 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nicholas Medforth-Mills, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations! · AndonicO Hail! 12:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Romanian "Royal Family Council"

Any thoughts yet? DBD 11:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Russian grand duchesses

Hi Kate, regarding Template:Russian grand duchesses: Are we going to list all grand duchesses here or just the grand duchesses of the blood imperial? If just the former, we should consider adding married names as with the British princesses template, e.g. Olga Nicholaevna, Queen of Württemberg. Also, Category:Russian royal titles templates should be Category:Russian imperial titles templates. Let me know what you think. Charles 11:11, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

De jure reigns

Yep, including 'Michael' and 'Louis' (responded at Wikipedia: WikiProject Royalty aswell). GoodDay (talk) 21:35, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

PS-I'm glad you brought up 'Louis'. Myself and BoBo had argued over whether Louis & his nephew Henri, comte de Chambord were actually 'Kings of France'. GoodDay (talk) 21:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Greek kids

Hi Kate. I don't think the different information of things like godparents really warrants an article. Lots of people have those. I argue against "future" things and feel they should be dealt with when they happen, not before. If it were not for the titles, all of these people would most certainly fail the notability requirements. The title does, however, give people the wrong impression of notability. I am all for royal articles, but I think we need to decrease our pool of them and concentrate on the notable individuals. Maybe Constantine Alexios will be notable in his own right in the future, but as it stands he is not notable without his father or grandfather. Charles 19:06, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

QVD

Thanks for your quick reply. I recall someone doing something similar in the lists of British princes, etc, about the frequency of names but I believe it was shot down for whatever reason. On an aside, a number of the articles are probably "good" deletion candidates. Queen Victoria's descendants are a very notable group, but many of the individuals fail the notability criteria. I don't know who is or isn't an inclusionist, but do you think it would be appropriate to have a royalty-related notability proposal? Charles 22:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
There was a discussion on the sorting of peers and courtesy titles. The sorting method for British titles is Designation, Forename Surname, ## Title of (the number being 01 up to any two digit number, if there is a number that is). This sorts all of the designations together, then by first names, disambiguated by surnames if necessary and then by number. This is done in DEFAULTSORT. Exceptions are made by using the | with a particular category. For instance, the 3rd Duke of X might by sorted as X, John Smith, 03 Duke of in every category except the Duke of X category. There and only there he might be categorized as 03, X, John Smith, Duke of to put him in order. That can basically be ignored though. Everyone else is Surname, Forename. Princes and princesses are Name of Designation, Prince(ss). Princely holders of substantive titles are usually, for example with Infante Carlos, Duke of Calabria, Carlos of Calabria, Duke, Infante. Only elements that are present in the article title are used. The category for QVD isn't any different from any other category. Nothing about the article titles makes them cohesive where they would have to be disambiguated by first name. I would only do that for articles like House of Windsor for the people with Windsor as a surname. I have to rush out rather soon so I'll post back about a proposal. Charles 22:26, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

UK royal dukes

I recommend a form such as Andrew of York, Duke, Prince for royal dukes (as with all other non-UK royals) as it sorts by their name first, then their titular designation. These individuals are firstly royalty and should not be sorted according to their peerage first. Charles 20:12, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Finnish throne?

Yep I mean Prince Heinrich of Hesse (1927-1999) the second son of Prince Philipp of Hesse-Kassel. All I know about the succession is from this Finnish newspaper article [1] there's a family tree on the second page which lists the heirs. - dwc lr (talk) 00:11, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

If that is all you know then further sources are required. Secondugeniture may have been required if another throne was held but that was not the case with the non-reigning electoral family. Statutes, proposed succession laws, etc, must be sourced in order to separate the Hessian and Finnish claims. Charles 20:45, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Kate! I can see your interest in royal families and I can tell that such an interest is of great historical importance. Families such as Habsburgs and the descendants of Victoria have with no doubt shaped modern world. But please, you have to admit that some monarchies, more or less controversial, have ended,because they failed to meet their high duties. It's a clear offense to Greeks to refer Constantine-Alexios as prince of Greece. Greece do not recognize titles of nobility as greek constitution thinks it as a break of the equality principle amogst its citizens and never wanted to have a monarchy, it was always, since ancient times strongly in favour of the republican state, as your own state,USA, is since its very foundation. I am also interested in monarchies in British or Austrian Empire, but we have to treat monarchies as a political system and not as a romantic habit because besides the grand ceremonies and the rich palaces the question how the monarch treats his people is always there when we attempt to analyse a monarchy. The greek throne had a motto; my power is the love of the people. And the one fatal error of this family-we admit that kings and queens can make mistakes as common people, don't we?- was forgetting this motto. Thank you for reading my message. It would be an honour of mine if,after this message, you are a bit more interested in modern greek history as a whole and you would investigate also greek history from peoples' point of view.NemoMeImpuneLacessit (talk) 17:39, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

List of passengers onboard RMS Titanic

Hello, I noticed the FLC for the page and while it is a well formated list, I was wondering how complete it is. I ask this because I copied it to Microsoft Excel and according to it, there are about 800 rows but I'm not sure how accurate that count is. However, there were over 2,000 passengers, so if the Excel count is accurate then the list is not even half finished. If this is true, the FLC should probably be withdrawn and resubmitted once the list is finished. -- 06:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Princess Theresa zu Leiningen

On which fact did you base your claim that "she is not a princess"?

http://www.btinternet.com/~allan_raymond/Leiningen_Royal_Family.htm http://genealogy.euweb.cz/leiningen/leiningen6.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas,_8th_Prince_of_Leiningen http://www.geocities.com/henrivanoene/genbaden2a.html http://www.william1.co.uk/g4.htm http://www.emmerdale.org/qvd.htm http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~conqueror/genealogy_html/i1090.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.165.224.166 (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

N M-M

Here's the post-interview article:

Aged just 23, King Michael's grandson spoke from London about his ordinary upbringing, his memory of the million people who gathered in 1992 to welcome his grandfather, and about how prepared he is to take over Romania's reins. The two-page interview was viewed online by tens of thousands and attracted almost 400 comments. Cotidianul spoke with historians and political commentators to explain the fascination of the young man whose Romanian is none too good, if the monarchy still has a chance in Romania and what Prince Nicholas' chances are to head the country.

The presence of a powerful leader in Romanians' conception is the explanation offered by Emil Hurezeanu for the interest stirred by the interview. "This comes from the voievodal and powerful monarchical tradition. The idea of this undisputed leader above good and evil, who is the King, has been strengthened in recent years by the endless disputes among powerful people in the state - powerful, but nevertheless not one of them powerful enough to be declared the absolute victor". Hurezeanu also associates sympathy for the prince with his age: "A story involving a young prince from a monarchical family is always interesting: it has something romantic, inspired, lyric - many Romanians would like to see a soap opera script transferred to the surrounding political reality". The soap's plot might advance "at some point", but Hurezeanu doesn't think it will be soon: "The interests of the political class are far from a monarchical succession in today's republic".

Historian Zoe Petre thinks the image of the saviour has been reactivated in Romanians' minds with this story: "Romanians saw him through the clouds of our democracy as a charmed child, who even resembles his young grandfather". The former presidential adviser thinks the monarchy has remained "a focal point, regardless of whether or not it is considered a viable political solution". She notes: "the monarchy is not a subject that might return to voters' preferences and electoral pronouncements". Referring to what qualities a future monarch should have, she says: "better a civic and moral preparation than a specialisation in business".

Historians Daniel Barbu and Armand Gosu kill any enthusiasm by those who see Nicholas on the throne. "No throne exists. Nicholas is not a successor. The matter seems to me to be totally clear", says Barbu. Gosu notes that monarchy-related subjects always stir emotions in Bucharest, but regarding the monarchy as a viable institution he is equally firm: "He has absolutely no chance. Had the King had a son, maybe matters would have been otherwise. Princess Margarita's marriage to Radu Duda even further diminishes the chances for public opinion to accept the monarchy in Romania".

More nuanced, political scientist Cristian Pirvulescu doesn't know to what extent one can speak about a successor, but he sees the news as "totally new, not in harmony with today's news". "The exoticism of the Royal House has made interest in this person rise". The probability of a coronation remains low in Pirvulescu's eyes. "In politics, almost anything is possible. The current context is not favourable to monarchs". Critic and art historian believes Prince Nicholas' chances will best be evaluated by future generations. "Other monarchies exist in Europe where democracy is more secure and balanced. I don't see why it couldn't happen here in the future. Our generation isn't capable of such a thing. The next generation will be more cultivated, will travel more and thus be able to appreciate the differences among European monarchies".

Another istorian, Serban Papacostea, notes Prince Nicholas' reply on the question of his possible enthronement as "very well thought out, formulated in a balanced way". "This democratic variant is one of them. I don't see why a constitutional monarchy would be less democratic than the regime established in 1989, which imitated democracy and pluralism. Analyst Stelian Tanase believes he is witnessing a strengthening of faith in the monarchy. "Young people are beginning to find out that it represented a democratic and prosperous period. It's a spiritual state: that's the origin of this reaction". He notes the Hohenzollerns provided Romania with four monarchs, three of them exceptional (Carol I, Ferdinand and Mihai). "I don't see why they couldn't give us a fifth valuable king, to hold this very complicated country in equilibrium".

Historian Andrei Pippidi thinks post-'89 history has often been suitable for the monarchy: "Things went against us who, with all our conviction and devotement, wished to see the King back on the throne, because of the faith we always had in his personal qualities and in the even-handedness and well thought-out reasoning that he always showed. Likewise, because of the idea of continuity, of handing down tradition, which could only benefit equilibrium, an equilibrium that has been permanently lacking in the years of this republic. All these are true, but without a future".

Here's part of the interview (I can give more if you like):

According to the 1923 Constitution, for you to become prince, you need the King's approval. How do you get along with your grandfather - how close are you?

We've both been very busy lately, so we see each other more rarely. However, along the years, I've become ever closer to him, my relationship with my grandfather and grandmother becoming warmer each year. In the past we saw each other more often, but now we're more busy - I'm here in the UK, and they're in Romania and Switzerland.

How would you describe His Majesty?

As a man with an extremely powerful character and at the same time very friendly and likable. He's often there when you need him, he's often on the good side of things. I've learnt very much from him. I'm also fascinated by his preoccupation for military Jeeps, for cars and for the way in which he cultivates this hobby. I'm also in love with cars, boats, anything motorised, but not as "badly" as my grandfather... (laughs)

What do you think the history textbooks should write about your grandfather?

First of all they should write about King Michael's role in the Second World War, about how much he did for Romania and, in shortening the war, for Europe. I think this is the most important period to mention, his position in an era influenced by people like Hitler and Mussolini.

Let me propose a scenario: if Romania's political leaders decided to restore the monarchy and offered you the possibility of being King, would you accept>

If the country, if Romanians, were to call me, I am prepared to answer their call, I would accept to come to Romania. I am prepared to take this step, even if it would be difficult for me to tell you exactly what strategy should be followed. I would involve myself in the country's reconstruction to make Romania a stronger state, to give it more trustworthiness internationally. I hope to learn Romanian as soon as possible and involve myself in more projects in Romania, implicitly spending more time there.

What do you say to the supporters of monarchy in Romania?

It's quite difficult. I think the question is not whether or not I want to serve the country - I will serve it as many times as I am asked, with all my capabilities; however, what I would now like to do for Romania is to take part in projects that relate to my present activity, projects dealing with environmental protection, expeditions, organic farms, anything related to ecological problems. This is what I would like to do for Romania now, to do there what I now do here. I very much admire what Prince Charles is doing and I think he is a model to follow. In this sense, there is very much to do in Romania. Very much. To be sure, it's not a characteristic of the Royal Family to involve itself in politics, so all this activity would be devoid of such connotations. However, I would like to act as a symbol of national unity, promoting peace and societal unity. I want to tell Romanians that I have a very normal life, that I grew up in a normal family.

How do you see your future as Prince?

I honestly have no idea. I'm not the type of person who is so calculated as to know beforehand what I'll do in the years to come. I'm a very spontaneous person, letting myself be carried away by the opportunities that arise. Next week I might be in Japan or another faraway place. So I don't know what my future as prince will look like, what it holds for me. It depends on many things... Biruitorul (talk) 15:46, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

My pleasure! Biruitorul (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Titanic

Well, that was mighty fast! Thanks, I'm pretty new here so not prone to making large changes, happy to ask questions and help put where I see that I can. Freestyle-69 (talk) 07:13, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Line of succession to the British throne

In Line of succession to the British throne you recently edited "descendants of" out of

skipped descendants of Augusta Viktoria of Schleswig-Holstein, great-granddaughter of Louise Auguste of Denmark, who are already higher in line as descendants of her husband William II, German Emperor

Other lines in the article use the "who are already higher in line as descendants of ..." terminology. Did you make this edit on purpose? By the way, thanks for trimming out the "son of, grandson of" items. I added that bit for clarity but I agree it is unwieldy. I added a simple statement saying section breaks are mostly every other generation, that should be clear enough. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 19:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Photo for your father and uncle

Please consider uploading a freely-licensed photo of your father and uncle. Also, if you could add references to both of their articles it would be good. Just be careful of Wikipedia's conflict-of-interest guidelines. Thanks. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail) 22:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Sidney Leslie Goodwin

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Sidney Leslie Goodwin, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 03:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Frederick K. Seward

Another editor has added the {{prod}} template to the article Frederick K. Seward, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the {{prod}} template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 04:00, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Lol

No worries about stalking... glad you're here to sort through it all! :) Jmlk17 04:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with the destructive tendencies of the above - as per Elsie Bowerman. Regards Motmit (talk) 08:32, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Ohio Newsletter

This newsletter is delivered by bot to all project members of WikiProject Ohio. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please note this at the unsubscribe page. Thank you, §tepshep - Newsletter Bot Talk 00:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC) The above newsletter was delivered by Newsletterbot as per a request by Stepshep

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Piratesswoop/Archive_2&oldid=1192879648"