Talk:Hugh I, Viscount of Châteaudun

	Biography portal 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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 11 April 2016

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 — Amakuru (talk) 12:17, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

– The numbering was odd. Some sources do indeed number them this way (possibly in error), but the more consistent numbering can be found (see this French source). I'm also proposing using the English form of the name, since that is what we use for other viscounts, e.g. Geoffrey. Srnec (talk) 22:55, 11 April 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. — Amakuru (talk) 09:04, 19 April 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 05:13, 27 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – think you ought to take up the numbering and the English name separately, and present more evidence. Most editors don't know enough to comment. Or just do it, since nobody seems to care. Dicklyon (talk) 04:00, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - unfortunately the link you have provided is not to a page or section within a book but a book in its entirety, which, when combined with the limited access on Google books, means that it is impossible to confirm or deny your claims. Please provide an alternative source or a lot more clarity about the current source. Furthermore, for what it’s worth, a brief flick around the internet suggests that the current formulation is correct, however none of the sources I came across struck as particularly reliable so anything substantial which you can provide would be very useful. Ebonelm (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The link I provided should take you to page 381, which is the start of section in which covers the seals of the successive viscounts. As an exmaple, on p. 382, it says that Hugh, the third viscount, was the second of the name and the archbishop of Tours. That is our Hugh I. It gives all the viscounts named Hugh by my proposed numbering. Another sources is this. Both of these are old, so there is possibly a modern reconstruction that would change the family tree and the numbering. But our articles are not based on any such reconstruction. Srnec (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support: still had trouble with the first link (maybe it's because I'm trying to look at it from the United Kingdom rather than Canada) but the second source provided checks out. Ebonelm (talk) 13:00, 21 April 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.

Hildegarde: mother, wife or daughter?

I don't know which numerals are correct, but I do see a mismatch between various articles on English and French Wikipedia regarding their familial ties to other people. It seems to me that Hugh I, Viscount of Châteaudun didn't exist as a separate person, but has been mixed up with either his purported father Geoffrey I, Viscount of Châteaudun or his purported son Hugh II, Viscount of Châteaudun.

Geoffrey I, Viscount of Châteaudun (d. after 985) claims Geoffrey married Ermengarde of an unknown family and had one child: Hugues, Viscount of Châteaudun (redirects to Hugh I, Viscount of Châteaudun).
- It is linked to fr:Geoffroy Ier (vicomte de Châteaudun), which claims Geoffrey épouse Ermengarde, d'une famille inconnue, et a un enfant : fr:Hugues Ier de Châteaudun, just like enwiki, but simultaneously claims conjoint: Hildegarde.

Hugh I, Viscount of Châteaudun (died 989 or after) claims he was a son of Geoffrey I, Viscount of Châteaudun, and Ermengarde. and married Hildegarde, Viscountess of Châteaudun, daughter of Hervé I, Count of Perche.
- It has no link to frwiki.
Hugh II, Viscount of Châteaudun (died 10 June 1026) claims he was a son of Hugues, Viscount of Châteaudun (redirects to Hugh I, Viscount of Châteaudun) and Hildegarde, Viscountess of Châteaudun. Weirdly, it also claims Hugues had two children by an unknown mistress or mistresses: Helgaud and Hugues. The children are believed to be illegitimate as they did not succeed him. He was succeeded as viscount by his sister Melisende, Viscountess of Châteaudun. If anything, "Helgaud" = Hildegarde, and "Hugues" = Hugh, the same names as his purported parents.
- It is linked to fr:Hugues Ier de Châteaudun (mort en 1023), which says Il était fils de fr:Geoffroy Ier (vicomte de Châteaudun), vicomte de Châteaudun, et d'Hildegarde. It goes on to tell the same story: Geoffroy meurt peu après 987, et Hugues lui succéda. Il est cité à de nombreuses reprises entre 989 et 1003. On ne sait s'il se maria, mais on lui connaît deux enfants, Helgaud et Hugues, probablement illégitimes, car ils ne lui succédèrent pas à Châteaudun.

I give up. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]