Talk:Second Mexican Empire

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. (FAQ).Add comments
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

[edit] No neutral

Maximilian I was not a puppet, this page needs a more neutral point of view, other sources are needed because is totally written in the republican point of view.

According to historians, he was. If you have sources that contradict that point of view, then we can present a section of alternative views of his government. --the Dúnadan 19:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I have done a lot of investigation on the subject and I as well think that this is at an extreme republican point-of-vew, Maximilian was not a puppet and did very good things during his reign. This needs to be more neutral. As for the current pretendors to the throne of mexico, I think it is well written but for the part of the opinions "an arrogant family..." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.134.26.32 (talk) 20:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Maybe you should cite the books of your investigation. --the Dúnadan 00:52, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

funny, there are no sources cited saying he was a puppet, or any citations at all. Rds865 (talk) 06:06, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Habsburg-Gueroust

IMPORTANT: Someone is trying to delete the last section that was included regarding the other pretenders to the mexican throne, Concepcion of Habsburg-Gueroust. It seems to me that this person has something to do with the Iturbides because he is constantly deleting the other claimant. All pretenders should be included, and there are official websites that back the Habsburg-Guerousts. John Labore (talk) 22:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Removed because of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concepción Heredia-Rosas - dwc lr (talk) 23:12, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

the article on Concepcion Heredia Rosas was deleted because it was wrong and gave no evidence. There is however a Monarchist Movement in mexico (www.mm-mexico.org) which backs her family and it is wikipedia's purpose to show all claimants with public support, such as the Habsburg-Geroust. If someone did a stupid article does not mean that the habsburg-gerousts will never be included again. I will make sure that they form part of this article as it is wikipedia´s aim to inform, not give biased information. John Labore (talk) 23:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

By all means add the “Habsburg-Gueroust” if you have sources that meet Wikipedia:Verifiability and ultimately if you can show this claim is even notable (Wikipedia:Notability) enough for inclusion. - dwc lr (talk) 23:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

The habsburg gueroust claim has the same type of sources than the Iturbide. There is a website that backs the Habsburg-guerousts as claimants and there is an official movement (the MM-Mex, www.mm-mexico.org) that supports that family. The iturbides have one website that supports them (www.casaimperial.org) and only that, and it is one that appears to be created by them - but that we cannot prove. There are several other genealogy websites that include the Habsburg-guerousts (thepeerage.com, etc) line. I ask that you please stop deleting the information I posted, as it is in accordance with Wikipedia:Verifiability. John Labore (talk) 20:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

An email from an “unknown author” in Mexico is not a reliable source neither is the self published website of the "Monarchist Movement of Mexico" which most likely run by the “Habsburg-Gueroust” family.

Why does the 1863 Almanach de Gotha not mention any marriage for Archduke Louis of Austria with Adelaide de Gueroust, presumably none of the published sources (Burkes, Lines of Succession) used at Peerage website also have no mention of any marriage. What published sources show that a marriage took place? - dwc lr (talk) 01:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The only thing I do know is that Maximilian von Gotzen is the descendant of Salvador de Iturbide, through his mother´s mother, who in turn was son of Salvador de Iturbide y Huarte (8th son of Agustin I). That rules him out from being the head from the iturbide family. After the adoption, before maximilian was executed, he sent the children back and they later renounced all their rights to the throne in their name and that of their descendants. That rules them out from being head of the Imperial Family of Mexico. The only thing that points it his way is the website casaimperial.com, which is probably his own creation. I am not saying the Habsburg-Gueroust are the ultimate and official heirs, but I do not think it is as impossible as that of Maximilian von Goetzen, who is an Australian citizen by 3, and in the case of his children 4 generations Australian - making it impossible and not realisting to see him as a pretender to the throne. I thought it would be a good balance to include the other claims, as the iturbide one is particularly week at all different levels189.149.44.31 (talk) 15:49, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Maximilian von Götzen-Itúrbide descent is not in dispute there is no evidence of any marriage for Archduke Louis. The Iturbide claim may be weak but the "Habsburg-Gueroust" seems to be non existent bar their own personal website. And considering the Concepcion Heredia-Rosas article was deleted with people expressing a view that it was a hoax it’s not appropriate to include the claim on wikipedia unless notability is established and reliable sources are provided. - dwc lr (talk) 18:39, 14 January 2008 (UTC)