Talk:Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

Contents 1 Old unilateral move discussion 2 Cut-and-paste moves are against Wikipedia policy 3 Name 4 Requested move 4.1 Survey 4.2 Discussion 5 Life 6 Nicholas' alleged statement supportive of Maria 7 Line of succession for British throne

[edit] Old unilateral move discussion

Today's abrupt move of this article from Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia to Maria Romanov was, in my opinion, too hasty and also bad. We know that she does not use the surname Romanov, and we know that she has an almost uncontested right to use "of Russia", also apparently accorded to her by her opponents in the Romanov Family Association.

I support that the title "Grand duchess" was removed, and hopefully will be, from the title of the article. Such titles have no place, in my opinion, in article titling: for brevity's sake, but also for avoiding quarrels about what are pretensions and what are true rights. Such titles and stules are explained in the text of the article.

Maria Romanov is too generic. It will probably later serve as disambiguation page.

Patronymic is a part of their namings. Thus, Maria Vladimirovna is good and NPOV.

We should defer to actual usage of her and of the meaningful others. After all, this is no place for artificial naming. And if artificial naming, as apparently here, is intended to express a political opinion of her claims, is doubly not good. It is POV.

I believe the actual usage for her is widely "of Russia". Thus, I vote that soon this article be moved under Maria Vladimirovna of Russia. 62.78.124.63 20:59, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Done. mikka (t) 21:05, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I agree. Her actual usage is "of Russia". I will revert now to the version that we have all consented to. Watercool 09:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cut-and-paste moves are against Wikipedia policy

Whatever is to happen, no one must do a cut-and-paste move. 84.251.186.14 11:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Name

Maria is known by the name which she uses for herself, which includes the title of Grand Duchess of Russia. The current name is unacceptable. "Standard" naming for pretenders is to affix the title to the end of their name. In this case, that would be Maria Vladimirovna, Grand Duchess of Russia (as she would the the Grand Duchess of Russia as opposed to just a Grand Duchess of Russia). Otherwise, she is at Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia. I prefer the former. Charles 18:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Charles, have it moved. Gryffindor 13:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Life

Does anyone know anything about her life? Beyond the succession issue. Biography should mention some information about a person's life.BorisG 14:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nicholas' alleged statement supportive of Maria

I removed the following today, January 8, 2006:

Her rival Nicholas Romanov, Prince of Russia, has -perhaps unwittingly- offered an argument that supports Maria's dynastically as daughter of Leonida, by citing in a published statement in October 1995, the public renunciations of succession rights by two princesses of the imperial blood immediately prior to their marriages: by Princess Tatiana of Russia in 1911 prior to her marriage to Prince Bagration of Moukhrani and by Princess Irina of Russia in 1914 prior to her marriage to Prince Yusupov. Nicholas argues: "These Ukases [publishing the renunciations] prove without doubt that had the princesses not renounced their rights, their issue would have been in possession of full rights to the inheritance of the throne of Russia."

The statement was used to suggest that Nicholas recognized the equality of the Bragation Dynasty to the Romanov's and the inheritance rights of females. That is not the case.

Nicholas' claim is that the equal marriage rules only applied to Grand Dukes and Grand Duchesses. Since Princess Tatiana and Princess Irina were not of grand ducal rank they were not required to marry equally. This position is the basis of Nicholas' own claim to be head of the Romanov Family. Since his father, Prince Roman, was not of grand ducal rank, he could make an unequal marriage and retain succession rights for himself and pass them to his descendants (i.e. Nicholas). In contrast, Nicholas argues that those of grand ducal rank who made unequal marriages could not pass succession rights to their descendants. Thus the male line descended from Grand Duke Dimitri, which is genealogically senior to the line of Prince Roman, is excluded from the throne because Dimitri was a grand duke who made an unequal marriage.

As regards Maria, Nicholas' arguments are twofold. Either Maria's father was required to marry equally and failed to do so by marrying a Bagration, or his marriage was acceptable but Maria is not the head of the family because Nicholas takes precedence over her as a male. Basically, Nicholas' claim does not turn on the equality of the marriage of Maria's parents but on his contention that as a mere Prince of Russia (instead of a Grand Duke) his father, Prince Roman, was exempt from the equal marriage rules. His interest in the Bagration's status is not because his own claims turn on that issue but because he wants to accuse Maria, and her father, of hypocrisy by asserting that Maria's father married unequally at the same time he condemned the marriages of the remaining Romanovs.

This whole argument is convoluted, and somewhat silly, but it is the basis for Nicholas' claim to the Russian crown. To twist it into an endorsement of Maria is a mistake. Nicholas is not suggesting that Princess Tatiana retained her rights because her marriage to a Bagration was equal but because, as a Princess of Russia instead of a Grand Duchess, Tatiana was not required to make an equal marriage. He is suggesting that the Bagration marriage was clearly unequal, but that Tatiana would have retained her rights except for her voluntary renunciation. The point is proven by the fact that he refers to Princess Irina in the same way. No one suggests that the Yusopovs were equal to the Romanovs but Nicholas points out that Irina was required to sign a renunciation of her rights. To him that means that Irina would have retained all her rights despite marrying unequally had she not renounced them.

63.215.28.165 21:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Line of succession for British throne

Line of succession to the British Throne lists Maria as #109, so I've changed this article to match. Presumably a few new births have moved her down since she was listed here as #107. Since that's likely to happen relatively frequently, I suggest that the sentence be reworded to remove the reference to a particular number. I'd suggest "Maria Vladimirovna of Russia is in the line of succession to the British Throne.", but since this can be a sensitive subject I'll leave that change to somebody more familiar with the sensitivities. Jordan Brown 18:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)