User talk:Jjadaran24

Jjadaran24, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Jjadaran24! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like 78.26 (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:12, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

September 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Alexander III of Russia has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

• ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
• For help, take a look at the introduction.
• The following is the log entry regarding this message: Alexander III of Russia was changed by Jjadaran24 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.99381 on 2020-09-13T23:19:59+00:00

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 23:20, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

January 2021

Hello, I'm Jack Frost. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thanks. Jack Frost (talk) 12:30, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Work on Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia

I wanted to thank you personally for your recent additions to this article :) I enjoyed reading it. Keep up the good work! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Knightoften (talk • contribs) 09:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

no problem! I love the Romanovs; they're very fun to write about.

Disambiguation link notification for February 16

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Duchess Marie of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Princess Elisabeth of Hesse and by Rhine. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:39, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Corrected it, and specified that it was Elisabeth of Hesse the Elder, not the younger old who died of typhoid!

Albert Victor

Please take your proposed changes to the talk page. DrKay (talk) 16:26, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

1. "After her proposed match with Alix fell through, Queen Victoria suggested to Albert Victor that he marry another first cousin, Princess Margaret of Prussia. On 19 May 1890, she sent him a formal letter in which she praised Margaret's exalted lineage, amiable personality, and love for England.[88] Although Albert Victor's father approved, his mother strongly opposed the match because of her dislike of Prussia and Wilhelm II, Margaret's older brother.[89] Nothing came of Queen Victoria's suggestion."

The above is about the proposed match between AV and Prin. Margaret. Explained more fully why it fell through, i.e. his mother's dislike of Prussia. This is not incorrect, I included the citations from letters by Queen Victoria and there is proof that Princess Alexandra was upset about the match.

This doesn't meet the criteria laid out at WP:PRIMARY. Primary sources can only be used for uncontentious statements of fact. They are not suitable for claims of 'praise', 'exalted', 'amiable', 'love', and personal 'dislike'. Per WP:FACR, featured articles should be sourced from high-quality relevant academic literature. DrKay (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Jjadaran24 (talk) 21:50, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Jjadaran24 That makes sense. Would if be better if I quoted extracts from Queen Victoria's letter in which she said complimentary things about Margaret? Same for Princess Alexandra?

Such as? I think it would depend on the length, suitability and tone of the quote and whether there was any interpretation of the quote. It's also questionable whether a quote that is not selected in secondary sources is appropriate. DrKay (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

2. "In mid-1890, Albert Victor was attended by several doctors. In Albert Victor's and other correspondence, his illness is only referred to as "fever" or "gout".[79] Some biographers have assumed he was suffering from "a mild form of venereal disease",[45] perhaps gonorrhea,[80] which he may have suffered from on an earlier occasion,[81] but the exact nature of his illness is unknown.[82]

The section about his ill health (potentially sexually transmitted disease) should be in a separate section, maybe "Health" or under "Further Scandals." It's not like knowledge of his STD was widely known in a way that would lead potential brides to reject him, so it's not relevant in the "Potential brides" section.

3. In late 1891, the Prince was implicated as having been involved with a former Gaiety Theatre chorus girl, Lydia Miller (stage name Lydia Manton), who committed suicide by drinking carbolic acid.[83] Although she was the nominal mistress of Lord Charles Montagu, who gave evidence at the inquest, it was alleged that he was merely a cover for the Prince, who had requested she give up her theatrical career on his behalf, and that the authorities sought to suppress the case by making the inquest private and refusing access to the depositions.[84] Similarly to the Cleveland Street scandal, only overseas newspapers printed Albert Victor's name, but regional British newspapers did quote the radical London newspaper The Star[85] which published: "It is a fact so well known that the blind denials of it given in some quarters are childishly futile. Lydia Manton was the petite amie of a certain young prince, and that, too, quite recently."[83] It was labelled "a scandal of the first magnitude ... on the lips of every clubman",[83] and compared to the Tranby Croft affair, in which his father was called to give evidence at a trial for slander.[86]

Rumours also surfaced in 1900, after Albert Victor's death, of his association with another former Gaiety girl, Maude Richardson (birth name: Louisa Lancey),[87] and that the royal family had attempted to pay her off.[88] In 2002, letters purported to have been sent by Albert Victor to his solicitor referring to a payoff made to Richardson of £200 were sold at Bonhams auction house in London.[89][90] Owing to discrepancies in the dates and spelling of the letters, one historian has suggested they could be forgeries.[91]

In 1891, Albert Victor wrote to Lady Sybil St Clair Erskine that he was in love once again, though he does not say with whom,[92]"

All this stuff is under "potential brides," even though the choir girls and ladies were not eligible to be AV's wife and no one, not even AV, expected to marry them. It seems misleading to bunch them under "potential brides." This should be in a separate section, "Romantic Affairs," or "Further Scandals."

We could rename the section 'Personal life'. DrKay (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Jjadaran24 (talk) 21:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Jjadaran24 That sounds good. I could link the stuff about his health/STDs and his love affairs under a "personal life" tab.

4. Princess Mary of Teck

I wrote about why Princess Mary of Teck was an unexpected choice, due to her morganatic blood and her family's debts. This is important to note, because it raises the question of why she was not considered before, esp. after Alix of Hesse and Margaret of Prussia matches fell through. I think you deleted it before I could save it though.

The claim about morganatic marriage doesn't make much sense. Queen Victoria's own children married people of lesser or similar status, as did she herself. Prince Albert, Prince Henry of Battenberg and Princess Helena of Waldeck were serene highnesses. Battenberg's parents had a morganatic marriage. The Marquess of Lorne wasn't a highness of any sort. Christian of Schleswig-Holstein wasn't a royal highness. DrKay (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Jjadaran24 (talk) 21:51, 28 February 2021 (UTC)Jjadaran24 Yes, that's true that some members of Queen Victoria's family married serene highnesses or even members of the aristocracy. But these drew criticism, like how how the Prince of Wales (Bertie) was extremely critical of his sister Louise's marriage to Lorne because of his non-royal status and argued that it degraded royal prestige and Louise might even have to give up her status. There was protest when Queen V's granddaughter Victoria of Hesse married Louis of Battenberg, because of his morganatic blood.

Even more importantly, AV was the heir to the throne and would be expected to make a royal, high match. Queen Victoria wrote to Eddy on 19 May 1890, "of the few possible princesses (for of course any Lady in society would never do)...." indicating that she wanted him to marry high. Of course, she was rather hypocritical since she married Albert due to her great love for him despite the reluctance of her councilors.

Furthermore, it's true that Mary of Teck was not expected to make such a high match, and her only suitors had been very minor princes and she was nearing "old maid" status at the time. Thus, I wanted to emphasize how unexpected this match was and only occurred because Alix of Hesse rejected AV, AV rejected Margaret of Prussia, and Helene of Orleans could not convert.

I still don't think it makes sense, apart from Victoria marrying a serene highness, so did Princess Charlotte of Wales, who was in the exact same place as Albert Victor: i.e. directly in line for the throne with only the prince of Wales between her and the monarch and being the eldest grandchild of the monarch. George III also married a serene highness. The more you look, the more obvious it is that there was a long history of marrying serene highnesses and this was no different. DrKay (talk) 22:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Take changes to the talk page please. Per Wikipedia:Consensus, when new material is contentious, it should not be reinstated until consensus is clear. Until consensus changes, the version of the article prior to the change retains consensus. DrKay (talk) 16:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:59, 23 November 2021 (UTC)