Misplaced Pages

Talk:Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Abdicata (talk | contribs) at 23:36, 11 June 2018 (Charlotte in Portraiture: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 23:36, 11 June 2018 by Abdicata (talk | contribs) (Charlotte in Portraiture: new section)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

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

Good articlesCharlotte 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.
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.
WikiProject iconBiography: Royalty and Nobility
WikiProject iconThis 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
Taskforce icon
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.
WikiProject iconBritish Royalty High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
HighThis 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.
WikiProject iconUnited States: North Carolina Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
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.
WikiProject iconGermany Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
LowThis 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.
WikiProject iconWomen's History Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
LowThis 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.
WikiProject iconEngland Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
LowThis 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.
WikiProject iconUnited Kingdom Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconLower Saxony (inactive)
WikiProject iconThis 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)

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 (talkcontribs) 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
Reviewing
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)
@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)
  • 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 (talkcontribs) 16:25, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Charlotte in Portraiture

My reorganization has inadvertently excluded Charlotte's golden age, the 1770s, because the article is oddly arranged and would result in clutter if all were employed. The chronological order has been upset by George's episodes of madness. Surely these magnificent portraits deserve to be displayed:

Conservatrix (talk) 23:36, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Categories: