Talk:Grand Duchess Xenia Alexandrovna of Russia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Royalty and Nobility (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.
WikiProject Women's History (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This is not CZAR ALEXANDER III daughter there is no such thing as Xenia in the royal registry as the daughter of a Czar of Russia[edit]

Eldest daughter of a Czar played so much role in royal succession.. And neither a royal is found on a charity work. Monarch is a monarch and not a politcian..and such bizarre autography had proven itself of this fraud enpsychlopedic fraud propaganda..this is a capital crime and grave offense against Czar Alexander III real daughter and her family still alive. A royal princess of an empire is the owner of the state deed of absolute wills ..the very signature and legal reason why Russia is a country..this is propaganda in perversion to what is Russia today...the heresy of prostitute. AS OF 1898 THE SIGNATURE OF USSR DEED OF ABSOLUTE WILLS IS NO XENIA HAD BEEN FOUNDED THERE...AND NEITHER TO ANY PERTIMENT PAPERS CZAR ALEXANDER III HAD ENUMERATED HIS CHILDREN..THIS NOTHING BUT A FRAUD BOGUS PUBLICITY OF WHICH THIS WIKIPEDIA IS ON COHORT..SELLING A FRAUD BOGUS STORY IN GRAVE MISCONDUCT ..AN INTENTIONAL FELONY AGAINST THE STATE OF RUSSIA AS A NATION AND TO THE WORLD..AN IDIOTIC SITE FOR THE FAKES TO SAVOR-- (talk) 08:34, 2 December 2013 (UTC)


Maria Vladimirovna is NOT the Head of the Romanov Family. Nicholas Romanov is the head of the family. Morhange 20:36, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

That is unfortunately a highly POV statement. We cannot entertain such here in WP. One of the alternatives is to say that "someone else" got the position of head of house. And, it should be noted that Nicholas Romanov was himself born of morganatic marriage. 21:18, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think it would have been possible for any of Xenia's sons to be Head of the Family, at least not through her. I think the position passes through male-line grandsons. In order for any of Xenia's sons to be eligible, they would have to go through their father's side instead. Morhange 01:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

One of Kseniya's sons could only be head of the family if all their senior male-line relatives died out. Mstislava 15:16, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect: one of her sons could be head of the house if all senior males have lost their succession rights, for example. And also, a theoretical possibility of Xenia's son to be head through her comes from a hypothetical construction of all Russian dynasts, including him, losing their succession rights and then the cognatic succession is needed, and in the hypothetical construct, the cognatic line not needing to comply to marriage requirements on basis of the cognatic line not needing to be a part of the imperial house, and deciding their dynasticity requirements by themselves. Shilkanni 17:43, 21 November 2006 (UTC)


As with Maud of Wales and Maria Fyodorovna, this page has been protected due to an edit war. Please discuss and come to some sort of conlusion. Craigy (talk) 18:52, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I reference specific articles on Haplogroup T (mtDNA) and Haplogroup H (mtDNA) which use the well known book The Seven Daughters of Eve by Bryan Sykes. The same Sykes who contacted research on the remains of the Romanovs in 1991. Tasc does not state any sources on his rejection of the addittion.

I incorporate text in the articles which was created by User:Saforrest back in February and has since been inserted to any number of articles on matrilinear relatives of both Nicholas II of Russia and Alexandra Fyodorovna of Hesse but was glaringly missing on the articles on the two main individuals.

I have tried to adress the matter in User talk:Tasc five days ago but other than some vague comment on it being "poorly written" he has really not made clear why he/she reacts so to the mere mention of a Genetics section in the article.

Examples of articles which do include the section and Tasc has never complained about include among others:

Anne de Foix.

As far as I can see it has not diminished the worth of these articles but has made them better linked to one another. I could care less if I am personally banned but I would like to see these articles stay in good shape and not suffer in quality due to the likes of Tasc. User:Dimadick

1903 Costume[edit]

The description reads: "Grand Duchess Xenia dressed for a costume ball in 1903. This seventeenth-century costume was the inspiration for a costume for Star Wars character Padmé Amidala in 2002."

Is this true? Morhange 19:24, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Request unprotection?[edit]

This page has been protected for the past three weeks. No discussion has occurred in the past two weeks. Are the issues being resolved and the disputed parties moving towards discussion? If there are no objections, I will request unprotection. Calwatch 00:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

head of the house[edit]

Apparently User:Morhange is a partisan of Nicholas Romanovich Romanov: [1]. This statement of headship has apparently gone through several variants also in this article. 14:07, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

the statement "One of Xenia's descendants would currently be the Head of the Romanov Family (or, rather: the Imperial House of Russia), but all of her children married morganatically, as did Nicholas Romanov's father too; therefore, none of them currently holds that position (uncontestedly)" is actually very correct.

The situation is now, and has been since 1992, that no uncontested male dynast survives. All male-line male Romanovs living after 1992 (the death of Vladimir Kirilovich) are regarded as non-dynastic because of their parents' marriage been between unequals. Because no male dynast survives, the Maria Vladimirovna camp argues that she has now succeeded as the Head.

However, had the marriage of the parents of any one of Xenia's surviving grandsons been between equals, i.e dynastically acceptable and not morganatic (in other words: had one of Xenia's sons married equally, not morganatically, and had a surviving son, grandson of Xenia, born from such marriage), that grandson would now be Head of the House. As it was, Xenia's last surviving son Vasili (died 1989) was the last male heir presumptive to the headship but predeceased Vladimir (d 1992).

The argument on behalf of Nicholas Romanov has been that he is dynastic because a Prince of Russia did not need to marry an equal woman, whereas grand dukes needed; and that the said difference were affirmed by an ukaz of Nicholas II. If that interpretation (which is untenable, in my opinion) is true and holds, the same actually applies to marriages of Xenia's sons, and all her grandsons would in that se´cenario be dynastic. Shilkanni 17:57, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Romanov[edit]

Are Andrej Andreevich Romanov (born 1923) and Prince Andrew Romanoff the same person or not? FrogBalancer 02:54, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they are. 23:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Footnotes need help[edit]

This page sure could use some help with respect to footnotes. While the page is pretty rich in citations, Wikipedia:Footnotes#Citing_a_footnote_more_than_once requests

Please do not use "ibid" or other footnote shorthands.

I started cleaning it up using named ref tags (like <ref name="name"> ... </ref>) but this article requires way more cleanup than I have time for right now.

Requesting help here.

Toddstreat1 18:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

i've gone through all the citations and replaced all the ibids. there is a problem of almost everything coming from van der kiste and also that i could not find ISBN 5-87417-232-7 to verify the bibliographic info.  — Chris Capoccia TC 10:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Request Quote for citation #19 (ibid, p. 27)[edit]

The current citation is

ibid, p.27

but it immediately follows a citation

Zeepvat, Charlotte (2004). The Camera and the Tsars: A Romanov Family Album. Phoenix Mill: Sutton Publishing Ltd. p. 98. ISBN 0-7509-3049-7.  Check date values in: |date= (help)

However, it appears (judging only by page numbers) that it is really referring to

Van Der Kiste, John; Coryne Hall (2002). Once A Grand Duchess: Xenia, Sister of Nicholas II. Phoenix Mill: Sutton Publishing Ltd. p. 27. ISBN 0-7509-2749-6.  Cite uses deprecated parameter |coauthors= (help); Check date values in: |date= (help)

But since ibid is used, I can't tell if this is sloppy use of ibid or correct citation. Please provide quote for verification. (this is why wikipedia doesn't use ibid - Wiki is not paper) Toddstreat1 19:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup of 17 July 2009[edit]

I have substantially cleaned up the article, hoping to address the concerns expressed as indicated by the article's tags. Please review whether the tags can now be removed. Thanks, Ohconfucius (talk) 11:19, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Marriage and Family[edit]

I'm sorry. I've edited Wikipedia articles before, but I've never had to change a footnote. This article asked for help with a footnote, and I knew the original source, having just finished rereading it. I verified and added that source and tried to change a second footnote as well, because Van der Kiste was only quoting *Once a Grand Duke*, and the original source should always be quoted when possible.

Anyhow, I can't get my footnotes quite right, and somehow I've managed to muddle the numbering of a third footnote. I've made several attempts to fix this and it's just not working. Someone who knows more than I will need to straighten it out.

The two footnotes I was trying to add were:

For "Best wishes and speedy return! Your sailor, Xenia." -- Alexander, Grand Duke of Russia. Once a grand duke. (Garden City, New York : Garden City, c1932), p. 94. For "She is fourteen. I think she likes me." -- Alexander, Grand Duke of Russia. Once a grand duke. (Garden City, New York : Garden City, c1932), p. 116. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)