Talk:Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Requested move
Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark → Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece … Rationale: A user unilaterally moved this page. Marie-Chantal is the wife of a man title crown prince, and reference to Marie-Chantal is almost always in the form of "crown princess" Therefore the page ought to be moved back. Charles 16:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Survey
- Support As nominator. Charles 16:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Support Gryffindor 14:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- The page was already moved there. That's where it is right now. Jtdirl moved it unilaterally because it was unfairly moved in the first place. It has been suggested that it should be moved elsewhere, so a new vote might start soon, but this vote is effectively closed. Kafziel 14:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Page move was invalid so page returned to agreed location
As the page was unilaterally moved without proper procedure I have re-instated it to the agreed location. We do not need to vote to revert a unilateral change that was not properly done. If the mover wants to move the page then they should follow procedure, make a request and have users vote on it. That is the standard procedure. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- There never has been any convention nor "agreement" upon precise naming of these kind of pretenders. Nor can such agreement be so blatantly POV as is titling her as Crown Princess. The unilateral move made by User:Jtdirl is, in my opinion, POV. It strengthens the royalist pretension. Marie-Chantal's article had been created as Marie-Chantal Miller. It was then renamed Marie-Chantal, Crown Princess of Greece but very soon moved to a less POV location, Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark where is had stayed almost a year, after which Charles above opened a RM, and Jtdirl promptly declared its location for almost a year as "unilateral and against agreement". ObRoy 20:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- Upon marriage, MC took her husband's name. Since her husband is titled crown prince by courtesy, MC is titled crown princess. How is Princess of Greece and Denmark less POV? That would be fine if she was married to one of Pavlo's brothers. Think about what you're saying. Charles 20:41, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- The rules on page moves, on naming and on content are clearly laid out all over Wikipedia. The page location follows the Naming Convention rules on Wikipedia. ObRoy doesn't seem to understand the rules on naming on Wikipedia. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 20:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- It was also ObRoy's only post. Charles 20:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Very clearly, User:Jtdirl is not able to cite any precise rule of naming conventions. I say that there is no agreement upon precise naming of these kind of pretenders. Nor can such agreement be so blatantly POV as is titling her as Crown Princess. ObRoy 21:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Marie Chantal is not a pretender, nor is her husband. Her husband was born with the title of Crown Prince and will retain it through life unless Greece brings back the monarchy. Also, the wife of a Crown Prince is a Crown Princess. Sorry, but you cannot change fact. Charles 21:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Using the titles "crown prince" and "crown princess", Pavlos and Marie-Chantal make themselves as pretenders. You Charles know very well that there is no longer a constitutional office of crown prince of Greece, therefore anyone using its title is a pretender - it comes from definition. No purpose to deny that they are pretenders. ObRoy 21:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Paul does not become a pretender until his father dies. There are no official positions of any Greek title, but they exist by courtesy and are transmitted to wives and the children of princes. I don't know why people pick on the title of Crown Prince/Crown Princess of Greece and say that an equally defunct title such as Prince/Princess of Greece is more NPOV. Charles 21:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- He has the pretension for a constitutional office, crown prince, already. I think the difference is between whether the title is that of a constitutional (or corresponding) position or just a title that does generally not contain any specific power of state. Crown Prince as title clearly gives the impression of constitutional position. Anyway, there are plenty of people in the world who explicitky disagree with them being crown prince and crown princess. ObRoy 21:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Crown Prince is simply a title for the heir to the throne, most of whom have no extra powers. If Constantine's heir was a cousin titled Prince, should that individual not have the title? Pavlos was born with the title and will die with the title. His eldest son will never be crown prince. That is the "rule" for fallen monarchies. Titles, other than general princely ones, tend to freeze. However, that being said, women who marry into these families, if approved, carry the titles of their husbands. That itself is a fundamental standard of royalty, deposed or otherwise. People can disagree with Pavlos and MC being a crown princely couple as much as they disagree with the sky being blue or water being wet. Those who disagree cannot change standard treatment of exiled royals. The most they can do is ignore them. Charles 21:40, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I think you just admitted it yuorself. Crown Prince is the title which carries the constitutional position of being the direct heir to the throne. That itself is a "power", and such understood by general readers. I agree that Pavlos was born with the title and he will die with the title - it means that the title will die with him. I agree that titles, other than general princely ones, tend to freeze. I just said that the difference apparently is between a constitutional position and a general title (the latter can be carried by high nobility too). I disagree with effect of marriage if done after the loss of the throne. There are some wives of deposed monarchs and they did not became queens (or equivalent). Their recognized titling was usually "princess", and it really tended to be explicitky lower than the husband's. That seems to be a fundamental standard of royalty and scholarly usage. ObRoy 21:48, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- A crown prince in exile is merely the heir to the heritage of a king. Subsequent heirs are princes. There are some exceptions to the marriage rule, namely morganatic unions and extraordinary examples such as Hermine Reuss (consort of German Emperor William II). On the other side, Queen Anne of Romania married her husband after the monarchy was abolished and she is given the title of queen by other courts and in general. The rule tends to be that women take their husband's titles automatically unless an exception is made. No exception was made in MC's case. The rule is not that women do not use their husband's titles names or use lower titles unless otherwise granted, except in very few cases (such as the Netherlands). Charles 21:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
[edit] Discussion
- See above. Charles 16:29, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'm no expert on this, but As per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) shouldn't the title just be "Marie-Chantal of Greece" or some such thing? I don't think "princess" should be in the title at all. Kafziel 16:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- No, there have been extensive discussions of this in the past. What it came down to was to refer to the person what they are most often referred to. MC is referred to as a crown princess, by various courts and in the media. Charles 16:43, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Where are those discussions? Why does she get "Crown Princess" in her title while the actual Queen of Denmark does not? (The issue seems to have been resolved by the above admin anyway, but I'd still like to get better acquainted with the policies and exceptions for future reference.) Kafziel 18:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- She gets it because she is married to a crown prince. It is a standard reference for the wife of a crown prince. A queen obviously can't be a crown princess. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 18:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, come on. You know what I meant. The queen doesn't have the word "Queen" in her title. Just her name and where she's from. So kings and queens don't get that, but princes and princesses do? Kafziel 19:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. The highest title held is not used. We don't write President Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, King Albert II as article names etc. But lower titles are used because often there may be multiple people at different ranks with the same name but with different titles. It is standard in biography to say "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom", "Albert II of the Belgians", etc. But it is normal in biography to write "Prince Henri of France", "Princess Mary of the United Kingdom". Biographers know "Mary of the United Kingdom" would be a queen mary of the UK. Lower ranks use Prince, Princess etc, with a crown prince or crown princess using that designation. The only exception is where the prince or princess has a title, in which case the prince/ess is dropped. That is WP rules and normal biographical usage. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 19:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Interesting. Being an American, I've never gotten involved in the royalty naming issue (which is why I didn't even vote here). Still trying to understand the conventions. I'm still a little confused, but that's okay. Thanks! Kafziel 19:25, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. The highest title held is not used. We don't write President Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, King Albert II as article names etc. But lower titles are used because often there may be multiple people at different ranks with the same name but with different titles. It is standard in biography to say "Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom", "Albert II of the Belgians", etc. But it is normal in biography to write "Prince Henri of France", "Princess Mary of the United Kingdom". Biographers know "Mary of the United Kingdom" would be a queen mary of the UK. Lower ranks use Prince, Princess etc, with a crown prince or crown princess using that designation. The only exception is where the prince or princess has a title, in which case the prince/ess is dropped. That is WP rules and normal biographical usage. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 19:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
- Oh, come on. You know what I meant. The queen doesn't have the word "Queen" in her title. Just her name and where she's from. So kings and queens don't get that, but princes and princesses do? Kafziel 19:07, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
One of ways to solve this problem would be to title Pavlos (and consequently his consort) using Duke of Sparta which is a substantive title. I have nothing against such, presumably recognized titles. ObRoy 01:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- You may be surprised, but that ducal title is actually less recognized than the Crown Princely title. Greece under the Oldenburgs never had provisions for noble titles aside from the princely titles used by members of the royal family. The title "Duke of Sparta" has only been used sparingly and, during the time that Greece was a monarchy, presumably only outside of Greece. Marie-Chantal may or may not be a Duchess of Sparta, but if she can hold that title which is used for the heir to the throne, she can hold the title of Crown Princess with a stronger basis. Charles 01:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- These persons are so little known anyway... Presumably, their admirers are writing titularies that are not necessarily correct. No proper authority apparently any longer recognizes these titkes. Please kindly show me where in the pre-republican constitution or laws of Greece the title Crown Prince actually is put into use - it may very well be a convenient invention somewhere. Btw, I again read the NC, and the substantive title is actually directed to be used. There also seem to be several examples around WP. On what documented basis do you say that the kingdom did not confer Duke of Sparta to him? Ducal consort title can be acquired by marriage, whereas crown prince and king are frozen in deposement stage (we have the example of Marie-Isabelle de Bourbon-Montpensier becoming Countess of Paris but not Crown Princess of the French). ObRoy 02:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- A Greek King stated that the title of Duke of Sparta was to be used by the heir to the throne, however, I believe there were explicit laws stating that titles could not simply be created. The reading of Greek laws would require translation into English, presumably where the title of Crown Prince would come from. Aside from leaving the title in Greek, I don't believe there is any other form that would have been used in English. The Greek Royal Family's website refers to Pavlos as Crown Prince with no mention of the title Duke of Sparta. It also refers to Marie-Chantal as Crown Princess. WP uses the names that people use for themselves that are also the names they are most known by. The crown princely title is extended to Marie-Chantal by the Greek Royal Family and by various other royal courts where the family is most relevant. You are forgetting that Pavlos is the last crown prince... The example of other royals is not relevant until Pavlos dies and his eldest son inherits the headship of the Greek royal house. Regarding Marie-Isabelle though, her husband was born in the lifetime of his grandfather, the deposed French King. Therefore, his father would would have been the last "crown prince", if that title was used in Louis-Philippe's reign. Charles 03:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- The crown prince of that France was Prince Royal. And you forget that Philip's father predeceased his own father, already during the reign. Thus, there are sources that mention the young Philip being the Prince Royal of France. Certainly the young Philip also was the acknowledged heir apparent precisely when his grandfather was deposed - it is very easy to find sources to confirm that his accession was even contemplated in the parliament, but by a specific decision, he was "deposed" too. Marie-Isabelle became countess of Paris, the marriage having taken place only after the loss of throne. ObRoy 03:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- This all depends on two things: Did France extend the title of Princess Royal to the wife of the Prince Royal, and if so, Marie-Isabelle could only use it if her husband used it. It seems use of that title may have been discontinued with Philip retaining use of the title "Count of Paris". Charles 03:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Greek constitution of 1911: [1]. Relevant portions were in force most of the relevant period - actually, much of its wording lives yet in current constitution. No provision denies the king's power to grant noble titles. No provision says anything about title of crown prince, there are provisions that deal with the successor (whatever is the successor's=heir's title). ObRoy 03:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- The Duke of Sparta issue arose in 1869, before that version of the constitution. If it wasn't subsequently created, it didn't exist after the constitution was revised. The constitution says nother of either title, but crown prince is and has been used. Charles 03:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
I believe George I granted the future Konstantin I as duke of Sparta. You know, monarchs have inherent powers. Probably no one denies, if a monarch grants a noble title. Actually, you are wrong in assuming that if a later constitution does not mention something, it is invalid - the case is contrary, usually the law is understood as if something that exists is not forbidden by later legislation, it continues as right - were you familiar with US c, you would know the constitutional protection of unenumerated rights. There was the constitutional position of heir-successor in Greek monarchy, but only some tradition or suchlike has made it "crown prince". Now the position is abolished. I believe it is frozen, whereas title such as Sparta is not. ObRoy 03:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
- Marlene Koenig, an author who personally interviews many royals for her writings, specifically asked Constantine II if Pavlos was Duke of Sparta. Constantine said no. You have to remember, the Greek monarchs were consitutional monarchs. George I simply did not have the "power" to legally grant the title of duke to anyone. The title Duke of Sparta was merely a style, in shaky use, that seems to fallen out of use altogether. The right to grant such titles didn't exist in the first place. Crown Prince is the English style for the eldest son and heir of a Greek king, and as such, the wife of a crown prince is a crown princess. Charles 04:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
- I think that this sort of discussion about the issue has been gone through in other places already. However, it is easy to presume that the deposed CII wants to show explicit Greece-titles in each members' titulary, whereas Sparta in his ambition would be too obscure. That does not change the fact that duke of Sparta is the substantive title that has been in use almost 150 years. Btw, when comparing their numbers by google, the fixed "Crown Prince of Greece" got only a number of hits which is in same degree of magnitude as is that of fixed "Duke of Sparta". We cannot say that CrPr is any overwhelmingly more usual... ObRoy 06:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Duke of Sparta gets less hits than Crown Prince Pavlos of Greece. The use of that unofficial title has been discontinued. Charles 15:39, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
-
[edit] old talks
erm, she was never a crown princess of Greece. I seriously doubt whether we can endorse this sort of royal pretension here. Her husband apparently retains the title, as he was a recognized crown prince in his childhood, though was deposed. Here, same principle should be applied as is with so-called Queen Anne of Romania. Arrigo 19:31, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
I agree with you however, I think that given the situation she should be styled as such, I mena so is Crown Princess Katherine of Yugoslavia, and we still style the old German, French and Italian Aristocrats using their claimed titles. So although she is not technically the Crown Princess, she is styled as such Mac Domhnaill 22:54, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
This page is located in the wrong spot. to title it as Marie-Chantal, Princess of Greece and Denmark, you are implying by wikipedia standards that she is The Princess of Greece and Denmark which she is not. I am going to move it to Crown Princess Pavlos of Greece which is where it should be. Mac Domhnaill 19:58, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Note
This page contains unsigned edits by user:217.140.193.123 (aka user:Arrigo)
Further, these unsigned edits appear to have had only a single goal: find a sort of justification for the express creation of double redirects on the Yougoslavian Princess, only hyperlinked from this talk page, and this hyperlink exclusively resulting from his unsigned edit, when Arrigo/217 started the creation of these double redirects, all of these edits and creations on the same day (21 September 2005), see user talk:Arrigo#Double redirects (again) --Francis Schonken 10:02, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
- Arrigo please stop moving royal articles in general, your actions on wikipedia since day 1 seem to have only focused on that. you have barely contributed anything productive less alone even created a single article. stop moving before discussing it first. Gryffindor 12:43, 24 September 2005 (UTC)