Talk:Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Finnusertop (talk | contribs) at 16:25, 8 June 2018 (→CITEVAR: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 16:25, 8 June 2018 by Finnusertop (talk | contribs) (→CITEVAR: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Template:Good article is only for Misplaced Pages:Good articles.

Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: June 8, 2018.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 6 months

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Misplaced Pages'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
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility (assessed as High-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

British Royalty High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United States: North Carolina Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by WikiProject North Carolina (assessed as Low-importance).

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Germany Low‑importance

	Germany portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal 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 Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lower Saxony (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lower Saxony, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Lower SaxonyWikipedia:WikiProject Lower SaxonyTemplate:WikiProject Lower SaxonyLower Saxony

Charlotte, North Carolina

Was Charlotte, North Carolina also named after her? Michael Hardy 00:02, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Yes. It's even the county seat of Mecklenburg County, North Carolina. RickK 00:06, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Longest Time as Consort

The Death subsection says, "She is the second longest-serving consort in British history (after the present Duke of Edinburgh), having served as such from her marriage (on 8 September 1761) to her death (17 November 1818), a total of 57 years and 70 days." The Duke of Edinburgh's page echoes this, saying "e is the longest-serving consort of a reigning British monarch...." But it also correctly notes that he did not become consort to a monarch until Elizabeth II's accession to the throne in 1952, meaning he has been a consort for 70 years, but to the monarch for only 55. Am I misunderstanding something? Or is this language confusingly written? I hesitate to change both articles as I lack any knowledge of the subject. Czrisher (talk) 21:06, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't see anything confusing. I think you've just made an arithmetic error: 2017 − 1952 = 65. 65 is greater than 57. DrKay (talk) 07:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

My thanks to DrKay and chagrined regret at having wasted time through foolish error. Czrisher (talk) 18:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110101094028/http://www.hrp.org.uk/discoverthepalaces/Historyandstories/Surprisingstories/QueenCharlotteshatchment.aspx to http://www.hrp.org.uk/discoverthepalaces/Historyandstories/Surprisingstories/QueenCharlotteshatchment.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:30, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

African ancestry section is huge mass of OR

I don't see any sources in this section which review the claims of African ancestry and say that they're incorrect; the "actually Valdes is wrong because" seems to all come from a Misplaced Pages editor. Does anyone have any sources, or does the section need to be cut down? –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 20:59, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

There's some criticism at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/retropolis/wp/2017/11/27/britains-black-queen-will-meghan-markle-really-be-the-first-mixed-race-royal/?utm_term=.a6dac0d4a2d3, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/mar/12/race-monarchy, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smartnews-arts-culture/5-things-you-didnt-know-about-queen-charlotte-180967373/, and http://www.philly.com/philly/news/meghan-markle-mixed-race-prince-harry-queen-charlotte-20171128.html. They could be used to re-draft the section. DrKay (talk) 21:12, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree with Roscelese. A lot of the citations in this section appear to be drawn from obscure Portuguese publications, hence impossible to verify because this is English Misplaced Pages after all. I've made an attempt to add text from the sources that DrKay suggested. Please review and guide accordingly--DanJazzy (talk) 01:54, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is transcluded from Talk:Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs) 16:31, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

I'll be starting this review in the next couple of days. auntieruth (talk) 16:31, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

2nd paragraph of "Life as Queen" needs a citation. Many other citations are missing. Placing onhold for 7 days. auntieruth (talk) 19:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@Auntieruth55: The short passage about the birth of her children and the two childhood deaths? I can see about remedying that, but will you not list the other complaints? – Conservatrix (talk) 19:58, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@Auntieruth55: Comment. This article has extensive copyright violations of several sources, so please check it with the Earwig copyvio tool. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:05, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

1785: War of Bavarian Succession was over in 1779. Are you referring to the territorial deal between Joseph and Charles Theodore, over some territory in the Netherlands?

Not done Unable to find sourcing that references British involvement in the territorial disputes of 1785.

several citations missing (marked) Done
section on legacy has some text pretty close to the source. could you rework this more in your own words?

Question: The only citation was attached to a list. You want me to reword a list of locations?

direct citation on David Buck's comment?

Not done Seemingly cannot be found without access to The Boston Globe Archives.

rework sentence According to Mario de Valdes y Cocom, Charlotte may have had African ancestry, via descent from Margarita de Castro e Souza, a 15th-century Portuguese noblewoman, who traced her ancestry to King Afonso III of Portugal (1210–1279) and one of his mistresses, Madragana (c. 1230–?). For example, ....Cocoim, historian of the African Diaspora, posits that Charlotte may have had some African ancestry; she descended from Margarita de Castro e Souza, a 15.... etc. Done
would be interesting to dig out a cite on introduction of Christmas tree (or did I miss it).

Question: Where was a Christmas tree mentioned? Are you referencing the tradition of Queen Victoria and Prince Albert?

there are several citations still missing, and one leads to an error of fact.
what was the source on the dispute of 1785? It cannot be that they were intervening in the war. Where did that statement come from?

Question: In 1785 the plan to swap Bavaria for the Austrian Netherlands was secretly negotiated again, this time Emperor Joseph II. in favour of the deal, although Bavaria provided considerably lower revenues than the Austrian Netherlands. Yet Prussia threatened with war when Frederick the Great heard of the project, Saxony, Hannover, Mainz sided with Prussia; the plan was not realized. This is all that could be found on Bavarian politics in 1785. Your call on whether the statement is removed.

source of deaths of Octavius and Alfred? Done
source on Queen's death Done
Fitzgerald source needs proper link to online google books. Ideally, maybe you could find some page numbers and link to them. Simplty linking to the book at every sentence in a paragraph is insufficient, especially if you're going to take this further than GA.

Partly done: Google books link found. Page citations not done.

Sources on Bloomsbury memorial, Rutgers, Charlotte Durham, and Madness of King George needed. Done

I added sources on Rutgers. auntieruth (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

you can cite some of this material to Walley Oullton's published memoirs auntieruth (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

still needs a citation on first paragraph of "early life" and first paragraph of "marriage" Done
I tightened up the sourcing on several other paragraphs. Every sentence doesn't need a cite, but theparagraph did. It would ultimately be helpful if you had page citations. I understand that you might not be interested in that....auntieruth (talk) 16:51, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

@Auntieruth55: I mean to get Charlotte over the threshold of GA status. Are page citations vital to her passing? – Conservatrix (talk) 00:22, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

No, as long as the source is there. We do need citations on those paragraphs mentioned above. I fixed War of Bavarian Succession, and a couple of other spots. Find those missing citations on those paragraphs, and we're good.auntieruth (talk) 13:45, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

@Auntieruth55: The deed is done. – Conservatrix (talk) 23:58, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

Lowercase sigmabot III

Greetings! I would like to establish lowercase sigmabot III on this talk page to manage the discussion backlog. Please post your thoughts, support or objections below so that we might reach consensus. Thank you. - Conservatrix (talk) 08:16, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Done 48hrs no objections. – Conservatrix (talk) 01:48, 14 May 2018 (UTC)

Portraits

Why should the section Early life contain a portrait from 1761? Why should text be squeezed between images, which is against MOS:IMAGELOCATION? Why should the portrait made of her as a princess be mostly within the section Life as queen? I would appreciate if well-intentioned and explained edits were not reverted without an explanation. Reverting a reasonable edit simply because consent had not been sought for it is as unhelpful as it gets. Surtsicna (talk) 09:58, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

CITEVAR

The article is a bit confused on the WP:CITEVAR side when it comes to citing books at multiple pages.

For some references, it repeats the long form each time
For some, it inconsistently uses both the long and the short forms
For some, it uses the short form with a link and the year in brackets (Template:sfn)
For some, it uses the short form without a link and the year

Please stick to one method and apply it consistently. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 16:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Categories: