Talk:Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans

message: A lot of unsourced edits are being uploaded rapidly to articles on French royalty. Some appear dubious, others wrong. Yet requests for reputable citations are ignored, deleted, or inadequately sourced (page numbers in books are essential to verify if the citation is accurate) -- while the wholesale editing continues. Please respond to these requests, either with reputable sources or more careful edits, before adding additional unsourced material. Also, much of the added material is redundant, excessive, or trivial. I've already recorded repeated objections to 1. unsourced allegations (e.g. that seem unprecedented, unlikely, or undocumentable) are apt to be deleted unless precisely sourced 2. redundancies (if it's in a box on the page, it's apt to be deleted from the text): 3. excess (details which belong in another person's article [e.g. parent, spouse, child], or which describe hard-to-verify details [e.g. "She felt envious": unless it's an attributed quote from a diary or correspondence -- how is it possible to know what someone who died hundreds of years ago "felt" or "thought"? Let's stick to what they verifiably said or did]), 4. gallicization (names and titles when combined, OK [but members of dynasties that ruled outside France -- Lorraine, Savoy, Modena, Bouillon, Monaco, etc -- shouldn't be gallicized, except for cadets born into a branch naturalised in France]; well-known phrases, yes; untranslatable terms, maybe; just for the sake of a more "French" sound or "feel" to the article -- not usually, and subject to deletion). Other editors will, of course, have their own views. Please don't use sockpuppets. I look forward to better mutual cooperation -- and better Wiki articles. Thanks. FactStraight (talk) 06:13, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundant & trivial content

message: Dany Mountbatten:  when you remove a picture from an article, why don't you give the reason?  How are we to know if the removal is valid or if it is an act of vandalism?  You don't seem to ever leave an explanation to your changes & edits.  Regards,  Frania W. (talk) 17:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Frania: I removed the picture because it is NOT Louise Elisabeth d'Orleans. The portrait represents Louise Elisabeth of France, Duchess of Parma, eldest daughter of Louis XV. I'm completely sure about it since I saw the portrait in the Prado Museum and it is the second lady. That's the reason why I removed it. DanyMountbatten (talk) 12:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Dany Mountbatten:  Then if you had a valid reason to remove the portrait, you should have stated it.  No one knew that you had gone to the Prado Museum & verified the identity of the personage. Regards,  Frania W. (talk) 13:07, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

text: P.S.  Bringing this discussion to Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans talk page.  Frania W. (talk) 14:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Removal of portrait

message: Hello. I’m @Dialuanny0, and I’d like to discuss this article’s name and the prospect of moving it. The name “Louise Élisabeth d’Orléans” is the name mentioned of her quite often, however, the name is also that of her sister’s, the Duchess of Berry. Since the name is hard to tell the difference of between her sister’s, and Élisabeth is still regarded and known well with that name, I’m thinking we could change the article’s name to: “Louise Élisabeth d’Orléans, Queen of Spain”, “Louise Élisabeth, Queen of Spain” or “Louise Élisabeth d’Orléans (1709 - 1742)”.  I will not change the article name unless many agree/approve of it.
Thank you for hearing my statement.
*Now looking at it, I’m not too keen on if we should change it as the Duchess of Berry’s article name is “Louise Élisabeth, Duchess of Berry” - nothing like the one we have here. Nonetheless, I’m always here to hear your opinions on the name change. It is a 50-50 with me. Dialuanny0 (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article name change?