Talk:Manuel II of Portugal

message: "Following his death, the seniority in the Royal House of Portugal was transferred to Miguel II, Duke of Braganza, his cousin." had been in the article. But this person had died 5 years earlier, so it was impossible for him to become the claimant. Someone who knows, please add to the Article the succession to the claim. StanZegel 23:21, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Even assuming that the alleged half-sister of Manuel, Hilda Toledano, were in fact the illegitimate daughter of King Carlos, under the Portuguese Constitution she would be outside the line of succession, as only legitimate descendants of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Braganza could inherit the throne. The Dark 16:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who succeeded Manuel II as claimant to the throne? 

message: This is ironic since Portugal (Estoril) has been the favored exile of all deposed kings ever since. --dunnhaupt 14:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Exile in England 

message: Is this the proper way to style Manuel post-revolution?  According to the article on pretenders, a deposed monarch does not hold titles in pretence. The Dark 16:28, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This does seem a bit off.  Basically, as I understand it, Manuel was still properly called King Manuel II of Portugal.  He was, however, no longer the King of Portugal.  Does that make sense?  He was still a King, but he was no longer the King of Portugal. john k 17:42, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

text: John is right. Basically, a king is a king unless he says he is no longer a king. Titles don't disappear but power and privelege can be taken away from them. Charles 20:38, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Title in pretence?

message: Do we have any information on the former King's cause of death? Something we could add to the article? GoodDay 19:19, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Emmanuel's Demise

message: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Manuel_II.jpg  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bear1952 (talk • contribs) 01:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Photographs of the King 

message: This http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7426349.stm says "Meanwhile, Portugal's Manuel II, who established a new life as an aristocrat in England, wrote a guide to medieval and Renaissance Portuguese literature but died before his own literary career could really flourish" . Although mentioned in passing in the article, it would be nice to know what the book title was. 80.2.200.73 (talk) 14:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  His writing 

message: Aquilino Ribeiro didnt shot anyone... i think this is wrong for purpose...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.175.171.187 (talk) 14:40, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aquilino Ribeiro shot the king?  

message: In the "Revolution and exile" section, it says this:  "After his duel with the republican dissident Manuel Buiça in the Oporto Cathedral, a further three days of almost constant street fighting were enough to drive out the young King."  What is this talking about?  Manuel Buiça died in 1908.  Wideangle (talk) 21:52, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duel with Manuel Buiça 

message: I'm sure it's just me being foolish, but i can't make any sense currently out of these two sentences in the Biography section: Young Manuel was born in the last year of the reign of his grandfather, King Luís I. He was the third child[1], and last son, born to Carlos I of Portugal and Amélie of Orleans in the Palace of Belém, Lisbon, two months after his father ascended the Portuguese throne.   As i read the rest of the article the first sentence is correct ~ he was born in March of the last year (1889) of Luís's reign.  But the second sentence i quote is pretty clear in claiming that his father took the throne before he (Manuel) was born.  Before i "correct" this, can someone explain what i'm missing? Cheers, LindsayHi 18:17, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess you can blame me for that confusion. Both sentences are analogous, but bring in separate interpretations: he was born in the last year of King Luis I reign, OR specifically, two months before his father, D. Carlos, became the King. Please feel free to edit.Ruben JC (Zeorymer) (talk) 08:39, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed it so the chronology is now in line with the article of his father.  Specifically, he was born seven months before the ascension of his father, not two months after as it read previously.  I believe it now makes sense. Cheers, LindsayHi 08:38, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Birth as reported here. 

message: I removed the title "King of Traulitânia" which doesn't exist. It seems to me like the senseless promotion of an article by linking it in the info box and succession box. Monarchy of the North has already got its own section and article, there is no such title as "King of Traulitânia" and Manuel did not recognize the restoration. This should be treated like the situation in Hungary after 1918 and Charles I of Austria and the similar Charles I of Austria's attempts to retake the throne of Hungary; the boxes for Charles don't call him King of Hungary after 1918 even though Hungary was a monarchy in 1920–1946.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 02:18, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  King of Traulitânia 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Manuel II of Portugal. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20100529093154/http://www.regicidio.org/ to http://www.regicidio.org
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Manuel II of Portugal. 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/20141129141938/http://www.shra.org.uk/Catholicism%20in%20Strawberry%20Hill.pdf to http://www.shra.org.uk/Catholicism%20in%20Strawberry%20Hill.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100529093154/http://www.regicidio.org/ to http://www.regicidio.org/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:56, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The current portrait doesn’t look great, I am proposing a newer portrait. Deppiyy (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree the old image doesn’t look great. It’s blurry and not a good quality image. The proposed image by Deppiyy is much better. Orson12345 (talk) 23:58, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portrait 

message: I'm pretty sure he tried to talk while gasping for air Historyisforyouandme (talk) 21:47, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Did he have any last words? And if yes, what did he say?