Talk:Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Name[edit]

Is the name of this article entirely appropriate? Surely Margarita would either be Queen Margarita of Bulgaria or Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, as her husband is named. Charles 16:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be moved ! --Killuminator (talk) 22:18, 11 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Law.[edit]

Are there such things as "equal and morganatic marriages" in Bulgarian Royal Law? СЛУЖБА (talk) 01:08, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Queen Margarita of Bulgaria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:02, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 2 August 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. Same rationale as Queen Anne of Romania. WP:COMMMONNAME trumps WP:OFFICIAL and WP:GREATWRONGS. — JFG talk 05:56, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Queen Margarita of Bulgaria → Margarita Gómez-Acebo y Cejuela – Never crowned as Queen, as her husband had ceased to be a King at the time of the marriage.Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) recommmends using the highest title actually held, which would be Doña. Considering using non-English nobilty titles is unusual, and using the full nobilty name wouldn't require disambiguation, WP should only use the latter. Anonimu (talk) 10:04, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose Margarita has uncontroversially borne this name and title for more than half a century, and nothing has changed in her status to warrant a change in her Wikipedia article's nomenclature. Having been widely accorded the style of Queen, our relevant guideline, NCRAN supports that usage. Moreover, Margarita has not used or been known as "Gomez-Acebo" in English for five decades, and facilitating ease of access to the person's Wiki bio is the purpose of English Wiki's article naming policy: English-reading potential readers are unlikely to know what maiden name to look for her under. The argument that Margarita should be demoted in title now because she did not deserve to be called a queen since she married after her husband was deposed by a post-World War II is novel, controversial (I certainly dispute it), and not supported by the many reliable sources which refer to her as "Queen Margarita" since her marriage in 1962. As for the prevalent custom of attributing to the consorts of former rulers the feminine equivalent of their husbands' monarchical title, it is not Wikipedia's function or policy to abandon long-standing, standard usage for political reasons. It is difficult to find a case where post-monarchy brides of ex-kings have not usually been referred to as queens in English (e.g. Portugal: Queen Augusta, Germany: Empress Hermine, Romania: Queen Anne).
  • Support - as Simeon II ceased being King of Bulgaria, before he marred Margarita. GoodDay (talk) 09:18, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - misleading and incorrect, much like the Romanian situation. --Killuminator (talk) 01:39, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Perhaps her husband's surname would be a more prudent approach seeing how he was Prime Minister for a while. --Killuminator (talk) 01:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – If Queen Margarita of Bulgaria is her common name, than leave as is. Ḉɱ̍ 2nd anniv. 21:39, 11 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This is a problem. I could add "Prince Radu of Romania" to this can of worms while the qualification of his wife as "Crown-Princess" can also be seen as problematic. I would say there might be a case for keeping the article titles for some of these persons per WP:COMMONNAME, while it is also true that it is common usage that wives take the titles of their husbands by courtesy, even if the husbands only still have them by courtesy. There is also the slightly related issue of how dynastic titles, when conferred by heirs to abolished monarchies should be treated. And there are some more problems with consistency that WP:NCROY doesn't address. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:51, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - in this particular case. See my above comment. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:59, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional Comment - Women married to titled persons take the titles of their husbands by common usage and courtesy. WP:NCROY states that "Former or deposed monarchs should be referred to by their previous monarchical title... Consequently that goes for their wives as well per the same guideline, whenever they were married. Unless of course the monarch in question has reverted to another title by courtesy. Perhaps it's better to have an RfC on WP:NCROY on this matter instead of talking about this on talkpages of individual articles. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 17:46, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This matter is now also discussed on the relevant Wikipedia policy project page. This discussion also involves the related move request on the article about Queen Anne of Romania. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 19:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 16 August 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha per nom. While there is no real consensus what her common name is, there is strong evidence that the current "Queen Margarita of Bulgaria" is inappropriate on multiple accounts. The proposed title is at least WP:CONSISTENT with her husband Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. Thus, moved without prejudice for a subsequent RM for another title, if such emerges. No such user (talk) 06:36, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Queen Margarita of Bulgaria → Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha – Recognizable, natural, and precise. Common name in English language reliable sources: see e.g. [1][2][3]. There is no evidence that "Queen Margarita of Bulgaria" is the English-language common name. Consistency with her husband: Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. DrKay (talk) 16:13, 16 August 2016 (UTC) --Relisting. No such user (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose If the article has to be renamed to the civil name she or her husband uses in Bulgaria, it should be "Sakskoburggotski", as we do not translate surnames into other languages, as we may do with royal titles. There is no such thing in existence as a civil Bulgarian surname translated into English. In view of that I also think that the name of her husbands article is not right per... any standard in that or any other context. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:43, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Am I missing something here? I certainly hadn't noticed how the article on her husband is called nowadays. Shame on me..... Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Am I missing something here? I entirely concur that Doña Margarita's husband's article should be at Simeon Saxecoburgotski while he lives, but in not one of the links cited above is that surname attributed to his wife (and as a born Spaniard who was married in Spain, she would no more take on Simeon's surname than Princess Sofia of Greece took on her husband's surname when she married Don Juan Carlos de Borbón y Borbón in 1962 -- rather, Queen Sofia (yet another consort of a living "ex-king") has always shared her husband's titles, as they have changed, but never his surname). References to Doña Margarita in English do not usually give her Simeon's surname, whereas before he re-patriated to Bulgaria to run for prime minister, she was normally referred to in English as "Queen", just like Anne. Moreover, in most of the articles cited above and, generally, in English, Simeon's children are referred to with princely titles, even though he is referred to by simple surname. So I don't see grounds for this move based on COMMONNAME. It seems more prudent to take up forms of address for spouses-of-former-monarchs at NCRAN, where we are engaged in doing so now with Anne of Romania. FactStraight (talk) 08:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A simple GBooks analysis shows:
"Queen Margarita of Bulgaria" 14 results
"Margarita Gomez-Acebo y Cejuela" 24 results
"Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" 1 result
It seems pretty clear to me what's the actual COMMONNAME...Anonimu (talk) 08:53, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
In all of those cases she is being described as Simeon's fiancée -- the name by which she was known prior to marriage -- not as his wife. When she is addressed or being referred to since marriage, she is usually referred to as "Queen Margarita" in English. FactStraight (talk) 19:41, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please provide references for your extraordinary claims.Anonimu (talk) 20:36, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please review the content of the links you provided, comparing the circumstances under which she is referred to by maiden name to those when she is referred to by her queenly title. That's whence came my claim. For example, Burke's Royal Families of the World, Vol. 1 exemplifies the distinction I'm pointing out, thus: On p. 53 it says, "On 21 January 1962, King Simeon married the daughter of a well-known Spanish family, Doña Margarita Gomez-Acebo y Cejuela, whose own background was also a tragic one: both her parents were executed without trial near Madrid in August 1936." But the very next sentence consists of, "The King and Queen have five children." And on p. 52 is written, with a photo of the couple: "Their Majesties King Simeon II and Queen Margarita of the Bulgarians". Of course, if all that one googles for, as above, is "Margarita Gomez-Acebo y Cejuela" and "Queen Margarita of Bulgaria", the fact that this authoritative publication twice in one article refers to Doña Margarita as "Queen" will be missed when comparing how she is actually usually treated in reliable sources -- by maiden name when referring to whom Simeon married, by "Queen" when referring to her since marriage. FactStraight (talk) 01:34, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As determined by the previous requested move, and that at Anne of Romania, it is irrelevant as to whether she is truly a queen or not. The only question here is what is her common name. DrKay (talk) 06:56, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And sources don't substantiate that she is most commonly known now as "Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha", any more than Hillary Clinton is known now as "Hillary Rodham", albeit that is how she is named when describing who she was before and at the time of her marriage. Context matters. FactStraight (talk) 08:31, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Um, "Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" is her married name, not her maiden one. DrKay (talk) 09:07, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, looked at the sources, they use Margarita Gomez-Acebo y Cejuela to refer to the spouse of the former king of Bulgaria before, during and after the marriage (eg. "Gomez-Acebo, Margaret. Spanish heiress who married a Bulgarian royal in exile. Name variations: Margarita Gomez-Acero y Cejuela.", "He is married to the Spanish aristocrat Dona Margarita Gomez- Acebo y Cejuela (born 1935), and they have four sons and one daughter.", "King of Bulgaria deposed by the Communists, and Margarita Gomez-Acebo y Cejuela, 28, toast of Madrid society: their second son", etc) Furthermore, considering your efforts in comming with shadier and shadier arguments, its increasingly difficult on my part to assume good faith.Anonimu (talk) 14:38, 19 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural comment. It would be beneficial if we could reach some agreement here, but judging from the direction of the debate it seems unlikely. I'll relist the discussion rather than close it as "no consensus", hope dies last. No such user (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging previous debate participants who have yet to comment: GoodDay, Killuminator, User:CookieMonster755. DrKay (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – If Queen Margarita of Bulgaria is her common name, than leave as is. Ḉɱ̍ 2nd anniv. 17:40, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm yet to see evidence that's the common name for th subject.Anonimu (talk) 00:29, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • I noticed that only the Polish version of this page has the same idea. Маргарита Гомес-Асебо и Сехуела Сакскобургготска is used for the Bulgarian version, Margarita Gómez-Acebo in the Spanish etc. Another curiosity is that her husband who actually was monarch, has a non regnal title page, yet she has a royal even tho she never was queen of anything and the title itself derives from her husbands (Simeon II, yet his page isn't called that). It seems to me that this page name is making Queen Margarita of Bulgaria the common name instead of reflecting a common name. --Killuminator (talk) 00:27, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see the problem here. There is a strong case for moving her away from her royal title, this is an example of monarchist bias on Wikipedia, still using royal titles for deposed monarchies. I support moving to "Margarita Sakskoburggotska", the name by which she appears to be generally kown in Bulgaria, and the title of her Bulgarian Wikipedia article. PatGallacher (talk) 15:24, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • On further investigation, I support the proposed move to Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, since her husband's article is titled Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. However any surname would be an improvement on this bogus royal title. PatGallacher (talk) 23:26, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha per PatGallacher. Since the husband is called Simeon Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is in fact the English name for their surname (as evidenced by the British royal house of the same name), this seems entirely sensible.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:27, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Her name in the article title and / or lead of the article[edit]

Sorry PatGallacher, but I think there might be issues that we don't agree upon. At this point (at least) I'm not insisting that she be called a Queen in the article title, which I would prefer, but the present one is bad in more than one way. The first mention in the article should at least reflect some official name. Saxe-Coburg-Gotha is not her civil surname in Bulgarian (we are not in the habit of translating civil surnames from other languages into English alternatives for them), nor is it a reflection of a title she may hold by courtesy in some way. If it is to be regarded as a civil surname it should be rendered in Bulgarian. If it's the derivative of a title it should at least be "of Saxe-Coburg & Gotha". And people who choose to be known by their civil surnames and not titles, should not have their civil surnames "translated" into another language like English. That is just wrong. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 20:24, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think the lead should reflect the fact that the latest move discussion has decided to call her "Margarita Saxe-Coburg-Gotha". There is a legitimate debate about whether we should translate civil surnames, but for better or worse we do describe several members of this family as "Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" at present. I cautiously suggest that this issue might be better raised in relation to her husband's article at present. PatGallacher (talk) 23:38, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for the body article or the lead to reflect a discussion about the article title. The first mention in the lead however should be an official name per guideline. That is not necessarily the same name as the article title. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 23:53, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Margarita_Saxe-Coburg-Gotha&oldid=1207306299"