Talk:Affair of the Diamond Necklace

message: Britannica indicates the worth of the necklace was 1,600,000 livres, but the wp article indicates without attribution that it was worth 2,000,000 livres. Given that the necklace as a whole was never sold, perhaps there is some uncertainty as to its worth, but there should at least be a reference to where this number comes from. 42engineer (talk) 00:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cost of the necklace 

message: The article states: "The police set to work to find all her accomplices, and arrested the prostitute Nicole Leguay d'Oliva and Rétaux de Villette, who confessed that she had written the letters given to Rohan in the queen's name." But Rétaux de Villette is male, so who is the "she" that confessed to writing the letters? If it's Nicole Leguay d'Oliva, the sentence needs to be recast. Or if it's de Villette, then the "she" needs to be changed to "he." Psurajit (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Error 

message: Could someone please translate or place the words 'soi-disant' into context from this sentence: 
A descendant of a bastard of Henry II of France, Jeanne de Valois, after many adventures, had married a soi-disant comte de Lamotte, and lived on a small pension which the king granted her.
And 'coup de theatre' from this sentence:
Then followed a coup de théatre.
Thanks,  hdstubbs
soi-disant: 'self-styled' i.e. someone who called himself a count (comte) but wasn't really.
coup de theatre: a dramatic turn of events.
--Jack Upland 07:46, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request for translation 

message: At the moment, the article uses both Commonwealth English (eg 'favourite') and American English (eg 'jeweler').  According to the Manual of Style, it should be written in one version of English or the other, not a mixture.  I don't know which it should be in so am unwilling to make changes. Help please! 86.157.52.185 12:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Consistency

message: There is a link regarding a sentencing "to the galleys". The Galleys it links to is an article on Greek/Roman/Egyptian and late Byzantium Galleys, which I'm pretty sure is not the intent of the link or the meaning behind the legal judgement. Could someone more familiar with this piece link it to the right place or include a footnote or stub about the meaning of it?
Joeteller (talk) 21:27, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Error

message: The image of Jeanne de Valois- Saint-Remy should be placed on her article as well. I don't know how to upload images to articles, but if someone who does could please put the image on the Jeanne of Valois-Saint-Rémy article, it would help the article.--jeanne (talk) 06:25, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image

message: I've changed the various entries of "jeweller" and "jewellry" to "jeweler" and "jewelry". The dictionary lists the "double-L" variants as secondary; also, a Google count shows 179 million hits for "jewelry" as opposed to 4 million for "jewellry". I realize either spelling is acceptable, but the use of the secondary seems likely to distract many readers from the text. SteveStrummer (talk) 21:46, 18 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling

message: Some of the unsupported claims in the "Background" paragraph are documented in Madame Campan's "Memoirs of the Court of Marie Antoinette, Queen of France", but I don't know how to add footnotes.
"du Barry was banished from court by his successor" -> Campan, chapter IV
"the Queen refused it with the statement that the money would be better spent equipping a man-of-war" -> Campan XII
"The Queen again refused" -> Campan XII  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.32.53.207 (talk) 15:04, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. We would need the edition and year of publishing of the book as well as the exact page numbers as well, that way it is easier for interested readers to verify the citation themselves. If you can provide that information I will be happy to add the citation. --Saddhiyama (talk) 15:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations needed 

message: The page states that "Jeanne had become the mistress of Cardinal de Rohan" by March 1785.
Events follow where de Rohan "begged Jeanne to arrange a secret night-time interview for him with the Queen". 
This meeting then apparently occurs in August 1784.
Moreover, the date of 21 January 1785 is given for when "Jeanne told the Cardinal that Marie Antoinette wanted to buy the necklace".
The wikipedia page is apparently suggesting they first meet up in mid 1784, before Jeanne waits 4 months to inform de Rohan she desires the necklace on January 21st, 2 months after which she becomes his mistress.
It is very late at night, and I am completely uninformed on the subject academically or professionally to any degree, so perhaps it is an error on my part. 
But I fail to see how this sort of dating of events can logically occur in the way the paragraph/section on the article implies it too.
86.129.242.151 (talk) 01:06, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency/Error within the dating of events.