This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
What was she, the 29th or 30th monarch of Portugal? It's very unencyclopedic to be so unprecise.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
She might have even been 31st monarch of Portugal. It is not very unencyclopedic to be so unprecise. In fact, it would be very unencyclopedic to be precise. Why? Because historians tend to disagree a lot. Was Beatrice a monarch? Was Anthony, Prior of Crato, a monarch? Was Maria II's uncle a monarch of Portugal? You'll find different opinions while reading different books. Anyway, I am not sure that we need that sentence at all. Surtsicna (talk) 18:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
The titles Princess Royal of Portugal and Duchess of Braganza should not be in the infobox and there certainly shouldn't be so much information about it. Please compare the article (and, as of recently, articles about other Portuguese monarchs) with articles about British, French, Spanish, Swedish and other monarchs. Here are a few examples:
The infobox in the article about, say, George III of the United Kingdom does not mention the title Prince of Wales, which he held as heir apparent, or the title Duke of Edinburgh, which he inherited from his father.
The infobox in the article about Louis XV of France does not mention the title Duke of Anjou.
The infobox in the article about Isabella II of Spain does not mention the title Princess of Asturias.
The infobox in the article about Gustaf VI Adolf of Sweden does not mention the titles Crown Prince of Sweden or Duke of Skåne, much less who preceded or succeeded him as such, or how long he held those titles.
The reason for this is that infoboxes are meant to provide the reader only the basic information about the subject. Maria II is not notable for holding the title Princess Royal of Portugal or Duchess of Braganza. She is notable for being Queen of Portugal. The essential biographical information about the last queen regnant of Portugal are not the date when she gained the title of Duchess of Braganza nor are the names of people who held the title before and after her. Such information belong to succession boxes at the bottom of the article. Therefore, I propose moving such titles from the infobox to succession boxes in this articles, as well as in related articles. Surtsicna (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Yes, that seems sensible. DrKiernan (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply. Surtsicna (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Because I didn't work on those article nor do I plan to do it ever. I don't care about Portuguese history anymore. I'll leave the related articles to the "experts" around. There seems to be plenty of them, all relying on google hits (don't worry, this is not a criticism of you, but of others). --Lecen (talk) 19:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)