Jump to content

Talk:Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna of Russia

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.220.13.195 (talk) at 17:41, 6 June 2008 (→‎Marriages: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Featured articleGrand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna of Russia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 20, 2007.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
January 5, 2007WikiProject peer reviewReviewed
February 18, 2007Good article nomineeListed
March 15, 2007Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

older entries

Shouldn't you guys be discussing that ancestry table over here? What's it all got to do with me? john k 11:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good God

This article looks horrible....the photos are throwing off paragraphs, etc. and causing un-deeded spaces. There are way to many photos.

--Mrlopez2681 04:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right and I've removed most of the photos from Olga's article and from the other grand duchesses' articles. Rearrange the ones that are left if you want. Layout has never been my strong point. --Bookworm857158367 07:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a problem with reference 6 that I can't seem to solve (must be bad syntax or something) please see if you can sort it out. Thanks. DrKiernan 12:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image

The image top right in the article (Olgachair.jpg) will be deleted from wikicommons in 7 days because it lacks a source and has an obsolete tag. The image I put in its place is labelled as Nicholas and Olga by the Beinecke collection. If you wish to continue using the image you've selected instead, you need to go to wikicommons and update the tags and source data. DrKiernan 17:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The photo labeled Olgachair is a portrait from the 1913 Tercentary and was published on postcards in numerous countries prior to World War I. It's definitely in the public domain. The photo that you uploaded was incorrectly labeled by the Beinecke Library. It is definitely of Tatiana and not of Olga. I also have seen the image reproduced several times elsewhere and labeled as Tatiana and Nicholas. Take a look at the other portraits of the grand duchesses and it's easy to identify them. --Bookworm857158367 18:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good, 'cause it's a much better picture. I've updated the wikicommons files with your information. DrKiernan 19:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Well written, well referenced. Only issue is the two-line section (Rumors of survival) which should probably be folded into the section ahead of it, or expanded to discuss the veracity of the claims. - Mocko13 13:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and folded the "Rumors of survival" section into the section about "Captivity and death" and also added a line about how historians discount Marga Boodts' claim.--Bookworm857158367 17:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Passed GA. Good work and congratulations. - Mocko13 15:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I am Greek Orthodox, and thought that 'recognition' rather than 'canonisation' was the term used for sainthood, but maybe the Russians are a bit different. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.140.60.96 (talk) 10:56, August 20, 2007 (UTC)

I like the article and its deserving of FA but i'm suprised that the section regarding her death merely says she was killed. How? WikipedianProlific(Talk) 16:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The assassins told the family they were about to die, Olga attempted to make the sign of the cross, and she was fired upon. She was shot and bayoneted to death, like the others in the family. An examination of her skull indicated that she was shot in the head. According to one account, she was killed in the initial volley because she was standing slightly behind her mother. According to another account she and her sister Tatiana hugged one another and were screaming and crying when Tatiana was shot in front of her. Screaming and fighting, Olga was kicked violently across the floor and shot in the head. The guards may have found it hard to distinguish between the four girls, so it isn't clear who was who in the different accounts. However it happened, it was brutal and violent and she was undoubtedly terrified in the final seconds of her life. In writing this, I preferred to focus on her life and the attributes that were considered for her canonization. The graphic details didn't seem necessary. --Bookworm857158367 23:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Olga's birthdate

In 1900, the Old Style calender fell behind another day, so Olga's birthday is more accurately celebrated on the 16th of November, not the 15th.

Clockworkgirl21 08:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who keeps changing Olga's birthdate back to the 15th?

Ever since 1900, it is the 16th! The 15th is incorrect! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkgirl21 (talkcontribs) 05:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're wrong. Going by the date she was born is correct. Please stop changing it back. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's the 16th

(Sorry, I can't seem to reply on the same thread.) The old style calender is 13 days behind the new style. She was born November 3 old style, so it would be November 16 new style. Celebrating it on the 15th is a day too early. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.1.1.150 (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it's correct to go by the date she was born. Stop changing it. I went by the date it was celebrated when she was actually born. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 17:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

birthday

The Romanovs celebrated Olga's birthday on the 16th themselves after 1900. You can't forget the correction day. It still lines up to the 16th. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkgirl21 (talkcontribs) 03:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Olga's fame

As I have noted in the edit summary, Olga is less well known than her sister Grand Duchess Anastasia due to almost a century of speculation about the survival of the imperial family. During her lifetime, Olga was better known. However, Anastasia was the one assumed to have survived, so her name is the one everyone knows now. For that reason, it's reasonable to state that Olga is the sister of the famous Grand Duchess Anastasia, who is famous due to those survival stories. This article is a Featured Article, which passed the FA review with that statement in the lead. At the moment, there is no proof that Anastasia's body has been found and identified. Tests are being conducted on remains found near Ekaterinburg last summer that are probably Anastasia's. When an announcement is made to that effect, it will be appropriate to include a qualifier in the lead of this article saying she was "falsely" rumored to have survived. Until then, it is best to leave it as it currently is. Please do not alter that information, which is currently correct. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Olga's fame is quite well known and recorded as the eldest daughter of Nicholas II and Alexandra Feodorovna. In fact more information exists on her than her younger sister, Anastasia. Bookworm857158367 is quite incorrect to link Olga's younger sister, Anastasia, to the proven fraud, Anna Anderson. Extensive DNA tests revealed that Anna Anderson was no relation whatsoever of the Romanov family. Therefore the real Grand Duchess Anastasia (1901-1918), and not the imposter Anna Anderson, is not as well known as her older sister, Grand Duchess Olga (1895-1918). The issue of the real Anastasia and the imposter Anna Anderson should not be confused. The Archives of the Russian Federation reveal a great deal more information on Olga not to mention numerous primary and secondary source publications that have been widely available for a great many decades all over the world. Therefore far more information is readily accessible on the better known Grand Duchess Olga than her younger and less well known sister Anastasia. In fact more information is known about Anastasia's older sister Tatiana than herself. The speculation on survival of Anastasia has proven to be entirely false and has nothing to do with Olga or Anastasia. It should be noted that Olga, like her younger sister, supposedly survived. Neither situation occurred as they were both impersonated by proven imposters. It is also quite incorrect to state that no body for Anastasia has been found. Russian authorities believe her remains have been buried in the Cathedral of St.Peter and St.Paul in St.Petersburg. The recently discovered remains are believed to be those of Maria and Alexis. This is well documented in countless news sources from the time of the discovery of the final remains. It is quite incorrect to state that Anastasia survived. None of the Romanovs murdered in the cellar in the Ipatiev House survived. This is very well documented in countless primary and secondary source publications. It should also be noted that featured articles providing incorrect information are able to be altered by any wikipedia editor. Finneganw 02:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The legend that grew up around Grand Duchess Anastasia has everything to do with the fame of the Romanovs. It wasn't only Anna Anderson, it was also the other folks who are listed in the article entitled Romanov claimants. Calling her the sister of the famous Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia is hardly inaccurate. The article (and the other Romanov articles) explains in great detail the tale of their lives, the discovery of the remains in the 1990s and in August 2007 and the testing that is currently being conducted. Nothing is inaccurate here. Russian scientists believe the recently discovered remains are Maria and Alexei; British scientists identified the two missing bodies as Anastasia and Alexei. Their reasons why are also covered extensively in the articles. The fact remains that two of the bodies have still not been conclusively identified. When they do make that announcement, it might be appropriate to refer to "false" claims. Until then, it's not. Finnegan has an ax to grind, but in this case he is simply wrong-headed. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 04:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
However, rather than carry on yet another edit war with Finnegan over said ax, I have rewritten the lead and trust that he will now leave it alone. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 04:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was never any axe to grind. What has occurred through this discussion page is that the page is now back where it belongs and that is squarely on Grand Duchess Olga and not on some misguided agenda about her younger sister Anastasia and the imposter Anna Anderson. It is good that common sense has prevailed and the matter has been resolved. Finneganw 08:28, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The admin told me I can add the new birthdates to the body

So please stop changing them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkgirl21 (talkcontribs) 02:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The birthdate is not necessary in this article. It adds nothing. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 15:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marriages

   I would really like to know why Nicholas' girls were not already married or in the process of being married. They were all of marriageable age during the time of their unfortunate deaths. Indeed had they been out of the country, or the palace atleast, their lives may have been spared. ere their parents trying to hold onto them for some unseen reason? One never hears of any romantic interests any of them ever had.