# Talk:Maria of Montferrat

Surely, the name Maria of Jerusalem is more suitable than Maria of Montferrat? Montferrat was her fathers name, and I suppose that is why it has been used. But she was after all a monarch of Jerusalem. This is reason enough to use Jerusalem in her name. Monarchs are referred to by the country the are a monarch in, rather than by their family name. Maria's gender is no reason to use another rule about her. The intro in this article also say that the name Maria of Jerusalem are used about her. Thereby, I assume it would be okay to rename the article. I will leave this message here for others to give their oppinion on the matter all the same before a move is made. --Aciram (talk) 21:39, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

She's normally called "Maria of Montferrat" in English, for whatever reason. You do see "Maria of Jerusalem" (or "Mary of Jerusalem"), but not as often. Adam Bishop (talk) 07:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I would support moving the article to Maria of Jerusalem or Maria, Queen of Jerusalem (to comply with Sibylla, Queen of Jerusalem and Melisende, Queen of Jerusalem). Surtsicna (talk) 12:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree, it should be moved to Maria, Queen of Jerusalem as it indicates who she was--David (talk) 14:59, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I never understand that argument. The article indicates who she is; why must the title indicate it, especially if it's an artificial title invented for Wikipedia that is never used anywhere else? Hardly any title indicates what something or someone actually is. We don't have an article titled Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia anyone can edit, do we? Adam Bishop (talk) 19:10, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
I agree with Adam Bishop. If Maria of Montferrat is more common name then that should be the title.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 04:07, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Maria of Montferrat/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Surtsicna (talk · contribs) 22:34, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Borsoka (talk · contribs) 10:13, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose): 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 

Image review

Could you add a map? Borsoka (talk) 10:13, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
File:Marie de Montferrat.jpg: caption is needed.
I would state that the image depicts her coronation. Borsoka (talk) 11:34, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
File:Arrival and coronation of John of Brienne.jpg: I would avoid the PoV in the caption, because we do not know anything of her thoughts.Borsoka (talk) 10:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
I added File:C. 1210 Southeastern Europe and Asia Minor.jpg. I would prefer not to have the same map in the articles about Maria and Isabella II because the articles otherwise look too similar. I put a caption in the infobox although I dislike the look of captions in Template:Infobox royalty and try to avoid them. The caption in the John of Brienne image was not meant to refer to Maria's thoughts, but if that's how it sounded, a change was needed. Surtsicna (talk) 08:43, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
File:C. 1210 Southeastern Europe and Asia Minor.jpg: I would name Boniface and introduce him as her uncle in the caption.
A bit difficult to pull because he shed his mortal coil in 1207 and the map says 1210... Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
:):)
Source review

Haberstumpf, Hamilton, Murray: translation of titles are missing.
Hamilton: ISBN is missing.
Waag: I would italicise the Latin text in the title. Borsoka (talk) 10:13, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
Italicised Latin, added the ISBN. I did not know that we were supposed to provide translation of titles. It's ringing OR bells for me, but the parameter does exist in Template:Cite book and you know what you're doing, so let's roll. Surtsicna (talk) 08:53, 31 August 2025 (UTC)
I doubt that a title's translation could be regarded OR. Borsoka (talk) 11:34, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
References 11, 17, 31 are OK.
Could you please check references 19 and 21. Borsoka (talk) 09:10, 6 September 2025 (UTC)
I cited Perry's 2018 book instead of the 2013 book... embarrassing :') Surtsicna (talk) 09:10, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
Comments

...in recognition of... I would rephrase ("in reference to"/"after"/...)
Done. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
...lacking a male ruler... I would rephrase ("without"/...)
It does not look good because there is already a "without" in the same sentence, only four words earlier. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
... in order to gain legitimacy I would delete this text, because it is not only unnecessary, but potentially misleading (did he need to marry her in a week to gain legitimacy?)
I think it is crucial and it sets the stage for John of Brienne's accession through marriage with Maria. Henry did need to marry Isabella as soon as possible once he had been selected to rule because political legitimacy is important. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
The contemporary historian Imad ad-Din al-Isfahani was shocked: when he asked a courtier to whom the paternity would be awarded, he was told: "It will be the queen's child!" Rephrase to avoid the use of two colons.
Oh, two colons is really bad. The second set is not actually supposed to be there. English punctuation standards... Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
...Queen Maria Komnene... Delete her title to avoid confusion.
I think her title prevents confusion as it helps distinguish her from Maria of Montferrat and it establishes her status.  Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, I do not understand. Maria of Montferrat was also queen of Jerusalem. Maria Komnene had been queen more than 30 years before her granddaughter ascended the throne. Perhaps dowager queen?
I meant that Maria of Montferrat was not yet queen. Dowager queen will work! Surtsicna (talk) 18:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
I would mention that Guy was Maria's fiancé.
So would I if it were clear... but some sources (e.g. Runciman) say that the sisters betrothed to Aimery's sons were Maria, Alice, and Philippa, while others say they were all daughters of Henry, so Margaret, Alice, Philippa. To make matters extra confusing, this Margaret is sometimes also called Maria. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
..., leaving five daughters Delete (repetition), and rephrase the subsequent sentence ("Maria, as her eldest surviving daughter, ....", or something similar.
Six daughters are named in the preceding section. This is the first time we are saying that Isabella was survived by five. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
...the custom of the kingdom... The case of Baldwin V contradicts this statement: his mother and maternal grandmother were his closest relation on her mother's side, and his claim to the throne came from her mother, but Raymond III of Tripoli became the regent.
Of course. I think Edbury notes this too. There are exceptions to every rule. I am not sure if this irregularity should be discussed in this article. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
My concern is that no one could refer to a precedent establishing this custom. So I would refer to the law book mentioned in Hamilton's study. Borsoka (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
How about simply "the law of the kingdom"? Surtsicna (talk) 18:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
...an impoverished and aged knight... Both claims are dubious. I would not cite Runciman on this subject.
Of course. Perry refutes this. I forgot to take it out. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
He may have been championed... Attribute this PoV to a scholar.
I got a lot of criticism for such attributions in the Queen Melisende FAC process... Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
Even so, I would attribute this PoV to a scholar. :) Borsoka (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
I do not particularly mind doing so, but the next time I catch flak for it, I am pinging you! Surtsicna (talk) 18:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
I will hide away. I am a wimp. Borsoka (talk) 10:49, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
Alice, Maria's heir presumptive, married their stepbrother King Hugh I of Cyprus most likely in early 1210 and received the County of Jaffa as her dowry. Delete.
Is it not noteworthy that her half-sister took a huge part of the royal domain? Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
Then make it clear in the text. Borsoka (talk) 09:56, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
Can't be clearer than that, I'm afraid. I'm fine with it being removed, though. Surtsicna (talk) 18:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)
...pronounced Maria and John married... I would rephrase it ("officiated Maria and John's marriage"/"solemnized their marriage"/...)
Done. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
I would introduce Al-Muazzam as the ruler of Damascus.
Let's do that. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
...Maria's consent was noted in most of John's acts ... Maria showed little inclination toward political activity... Contradiction?
Hmm. It would have been if it said "no inclination". With "little inclination" I am not sure that it is. Surtsicna (talk) 20:19, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
Did Sybilla indeed show little inclination toward political activity? She arranged her own coronation despite strong opposition, and also the coronation of her husband, despite even stronger opposition. Borsoka (talk) 11:24, 1 September 2025 (UTC)
I too wondered about this. Sibylla also negotiated with Saladin and was an active countess of Jaffa before her accession to the throne. Obviously they are all contrasted with Melisende. Hamilton says: Between 1186 and 1228 the crown of Jerusalem was held by women: Sibyl, Isabella I, Maria, and Isabella II. None of them had a strong political drive: they all married, in Isabella I's case four times, and they devolved power to their husbands. 
(Lead) I would mention that she was a posthumous daughter.
(Lead) I would mention that Conrad was her father. Borsoka (talk) 10:56, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
I actually avoided that on purpose. This seems to be a very rare case of a medieval biography where the mother is far more important to the topic than the father, so I wished to emphasize that. As Imad ad-Din al-Isfahani was told regarding the father's identity, "It will be the queen's child!" Surtsicna (talk) 11:38, 3 September 2025 (UTC)
I have suspected that too, but I do not think we can leave out her father, especially as she was named after him. Borsoka (talk) 01:54, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Okay, he's there now. Surtsicna (talk) 07:13, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
I have no choice but to pass this article. Congratulations. Have you considered creating a Featured topic on the female rulers of Jerusalem, regents among them? Borsoka (talk) 08:55, 8 September 2025 (UTC)

I have not, but now I shall! So far we only have Melisende of Jerusalem and Alice of Champagne as FAs, and we would need a few more to qualify. Surtsicna (talk) 10:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)