Talk:Isabella II

message: Has anybody else noticed that the English in this article is written in less than fluent English?  I suggest that somebody who is more fluent go through the article (especially the opening paragraphs) and upgrade and clarify the language. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.67.39.67 (talk) 13:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: English within the Article

message: There have been many women in history with that name and title:
* Isabella I of Castile and Aragon (1451-1504): also known as Isabella of Castile [preferred Wikipedia form], Isabella of Spain. Known to have sponsored Christopher Columbus' voyage to the New World.
* Isabella of Angoulême (1187-1246): King John of England divorced his first wife to marry her when she was 12 or 13. Isabella was the mother of Henry III of England.
* Isabella I, Queen of Jerusalem (1192-1205): married four times, she succeeded her father Almaric I and her sister Sibyl to the throne and was succeeded by her daughter, Marie of Monteferrat.
* Isabella of France, queen consort of Edward II of England (1292-1358). Helped depose and murder her husband.
* Isabella of Bavaria [preferred Wikipedia form is Isabeau of Bavaria] (1371-1435): queen consort of Charles VI of France.
* Isabella of Portugal: second wife of John II of Castile, and mother of Isabella I of Castile and Aragon.
* Isabella Clara Eugenia (1566-1633): Archduchess of Austria - ruled Spanish Netherlands.
* Isabella Farnese (1692-1766): queen consort of Philip V of Spain.
* Isabella II of Spain (1830-1919): Bourbon queen.
— Iggynelix 21:05, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Links to other Queen Isabellas (including Isabella I of Spain)

message: Did Queen Isabella II's husband become King Consort? If he did, was his reignal name Antonio I or Felipe VI? In addition, was Infante Luis(1867-1874) lastly born child, or were there more after him? If so, then please mention the last one, even if it was stillborn. --Anglius 20:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, there are other issues with that list of children... It lists only 9 of 12, and the way i count them, i get 7 (arguably six) who reached maturity, not five as listed in the article... -- Jokes Free4Me (talk) 20:59, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

text: He never got a rank over duke nor was king consort nor had regnal name in consequence since it could have meant a virtual degradation of Isabella as "true, single and legitime" regnal queen of Spain, which could have been exploited as propaganda by her enemies the carlists.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.244.129.121 (talk) 14:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Husband and Children

message: She really moves about. How about we just get rid of that Bourbon template monstrosity? --Stbalbach 23:02, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dancing Isabella 

message: Cosmos666 has added a box which shows Isabella's four grandparents and eight great-grandparents.  This is certainly not usual for an encylopedia article (indeed, often not for a full-length book about the subject).  I suggest removal.  If not, what are the limits to this? Noel S McFerran 04:10, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Ancestor infobox

message: Isn't "Cortes Generales" a bit anachronistic for this era? Wouldn't it just have been "Cortes"? (I could be wrong; our article Cortes Generales deals only with the post-Franco institution, and I can't think of ever seeing the institution in the 19th century referred to in this manner.) - Jmabel | Talk 05:55, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cortes Generales 

message: That's kind of misleading, since Juana la Loca was in basically the same situation (even if some of the technical details of her titles were a little different). AnonMoos (talk) 12:21, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Saying otherwise might be misleading. Isabella II was the first female sovereign of a unified kingdom known as Spain. Joanna was sovereign of many, many small kingdoms that became Kingdom of Spain only when Philip V ascended the thrones. Surtsicna (talk) 12:53, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: However, "first and so far only Queen regnant of Spain" is only true by a technicality, and not true in substance, so it is somewhat misleading in implication. AnonMoos (talk) 18:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Can it be changed to "first and so far only queen regnant of Spain since the unification of the kingdom in the 18th century"? Surtsicna (talk) 18:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Added Isabella I; the situation of Johanna is sufficiently complicated (did she ever reign in Aragon?) that I don't see explaining it in a sentence in an article on somebody else. "Only queen regnant of Spain in modern times"? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: A giantic majority of people believe Spain emerge before Philip V, I just saying. I like "in modern times" better.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 01:52, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Isn't Philip II, considered the first monarch of a united Spain? GoodDay (talk) 21:03, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As much as James I is considered the first monarch of a united Britain. Surtsicna (talk) 22:00, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually probably a little more than James I. Like history says Spanish colonization happen in Philip II's reign, not Castilian or Aragonese colonization, but only English colonization happen in James I's reign never British colonization. Also the Spanish Armada not the Castilian or Aragonese Armada. --Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 09:25, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: "first and so far only Queen regnant of Spain"

message: In both this article and the one about Francis of Cadiz it says that they were double first cousins because there fathers were brothers and their mothers were sisters. It should also be mentioned that Francis was also her nephew because Isabelle's mother was the niece of Isabelle's father  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.127.106 (talk) 16:12, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to husband 

message: Michener in Iberia reckons the probable father of Alfonso XII was an American dentist called McKeon arguing that Puigmoltó was away on maneuvers at the relevant time.  That's not a good enough source in itself but does any serious history address the possibility? SoulRebel56 (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Parentage of Alfonso XII

message: Was there ever a discussion to change the name to Isabel II? Nothing is changed since the page move.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 03:01, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Because it's her name and no one challenged the move. Do you plan to do any real improvement to this article or is this just an excuse to change the article's name to something you personally prefer and move on? --Lecen (talk) 09:20, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

text: I don't believe there ever was an RM. Haven't checked the article history, but I believe it was changed to Isabel I unilaterally, without little or no discussion. GoodDay (talk) 04:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page move  

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Isabella II of Spain. 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/20160119170507/http://www.gracianolopezjaena.org/port_of_iloilo.html to http://www.gracianolopezjaena.org/port_of_iloilo.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160920225158/https://36.media.tumblr.com/422a4260e9b6f63a74b2fe9dd23c5056/tumblr_n95vpnIbow1t3ijnxo1_500.jpg to https://36.media.tumblr.com/422a4260e9b6f63a74b2fe9dd23c5056/tumblr_n95vpnIbow1t3ijnxo1_500.jpg
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) 16:19, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Isabella II of Spain. 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/20170127062234/https://www.almendron.com/artehistoria/wp-content/uploads/isabel-ii.jpg to http://www.almendron.com/artehistoria/wp-content/uploads/isabel-ii.jpg
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) 07:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Isabel II which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 13:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: Since when is the age of two considered "infancy"? 23.121.160.252 (talk) 23:02, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  "She came to the throne as an infant"? 

message: I notice that the "three famous nevers of Marshall Prim" are so famous they don't even appear in the Wikipedia biography article on Marshall Prim.RichardBond (talk) 05:04, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Three Nevers of Marshall Prim 

message: (non-automated message) Greetings! I have opened an RfC on WT:ROYALTY that may be of interest to users following this article talk page! You are encouraged to contribute to this discussion here! Hurricane Andrew (444) 19:48, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  RfC of interest 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: moved. This is WP:NOTVOTEnot a vote, as you all surely know; although Support–Oppose !voters were split 6–4, support !voters provided far more convincing policy-based arguments than oppose !voters. Overall, Isabella II of Spain has more long-time significance than her counterpart in Jerusalem, and is the WP:PTOPICprimary topic. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🌺 Cremastra  (talk) 14:13, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Isabella II of Spain →  – Consistent with all of her successors (save for Amadeo I) and her predecessors Ferdinands VI and VII. Already a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Isabella II of Jerusalem is linked via hatnote. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Spain has been notified of this discussion. Векочел (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Women's History has been notified of this discussion. Векочел (talk) 20:02, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose - per Wikipedia:SOVEREIGN. Requires disambiguaton with Isabella II of Jerusalem. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 23:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Support per WP:SOVEREIGN. Disambiguation is not needed because the Spanish queen is the clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:29, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Support (WP:SOVEREIGN), primary and "Isabella II" already redirects here. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose - It would need disambiguation from Isabella II of Jerusalem. Dimadick (talk) 13:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

text: Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Isabella II of Spain is getting about 6 times more page views than Isabella II of Jerusalem. Векочел (talk) 20:05, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: That is irrelevant Apple Inc. is commonly referred to as just "Apple" and gets many more page views than Apple the fruit, but no one argues to move Apple to the technology company. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Except WP:PRIMARYTOPIC is very relevant. Apple Inc. may have more pageviews, but it also has to have more long term significance than the fruit to be treated as the primary topic, which obviously it does not so WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION is applied. estar8806 (talk) ★ 21:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

text: I originally closed this RM as no consensus. After a discussion at my talk page, I've decided to reopen this discussion to allow for further discussion of "Isabel II" vs. "Isabella II". Regardless of target, the page should be moved following the precedent at . – Hilst [talk] 18:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Support per @Born2cycle.  Killuminator (talk) 15:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 26 January 2024 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: not moved. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 01:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Isabella II →  – Per WP:PRECISE and WP:COMMONNAME. The Spanish version of her name is both unambiguous and more commonly used in reliable sources. Ngrams shows Isabel II is more commonly used than Isabella II, and "Isabella II" is ambiguous with Isabella II of Jerusalem. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 15:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Oppose the name "Isabella" is how the English Wikipedia recognizes women by the name "Isabel" in Spanish, like Isabella of Castile. Eliasparras (talk) 16:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

text: Support with comment - I agree with the spirit and rationale of this nomination. However, as a Spanish speaker, I would also like to note that Isabel II can also refer to none other than Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, as seen here by Vogue México y Latinoamérica and here by El País.  I am happy to add a hatnote to the lede should this RM be successful. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 18:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the English-language Wikipedia, so the fact that Spanish speakers refer to the British queen by her exonym is irrelevant as far as this RM is concerned. I'm not convinced that a hatnote for the benefit of Spanish readers would be justified either. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Support per nom; Isabel's endonym is more common than her exonym in reliable English-language sources. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure we all know what version of Wikipedia we're on. Guess we'll have to rename Felipe VI to Philip VI? AusLondonder (talk) 07:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If it were up to me. I would have those pages changed to Philip VI of Spain, John Charles I of Spain, Alphonse XIII of Spain, etc. GoodDay (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: But no reliable sources call them by those names. The habit of translating monarchs' names into English died out at least a century ago. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, not sure if all editors have noticed... AusLondonder (talk) 15:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment - This is WP:JDLI, not a policy based argument. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you pushing for this queen to be named "Isabel", when there's Isabella I of Castile? Why should we have such inconsistency? GoodDay (talk) 16:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

text: The fact  seriously thinks that we should move Felipe VI to Philip VI, something not supported by any English-language sources (even the very English Daily Mail uses Felipe) suggests their feelings on this matter are more personal, rather than policy-based. Will you be starting a RM at Felipe VI GoodDay? AusLondonder (talk) 15:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No. GoodDay (talk) 15:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment - The reason I am proposing this move to "Isabel" is because it is her WP:COMMONNAME in English. Margaret I of Denmark is called "Margaret" in English, however Margrethe II is known as "Margrethe." It may be "inconsistent" to refer to Philip V of Spain as "Philip" but Felipe VI as "Felipe" but we do it anyway, because those are the names that they are primarily known by. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 18:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not required here. GoodDay (talk) 20:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment - I'm not proposing this move because "Isabel II" is the more common name in Spanish. I'm proposing this because "Isabel II" is both the common name in English, and and more WP:PRECISE, as "Isabella II" is ambiguous with Isabella II of Jerusalem. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 11:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already mentioned in the lead that "Isabel" is the Spanish version of the name. Why isn't that good enough?  GoodDay (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus. BD2412 T 17:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I've requested closure for this at Wikipedia:Closure_requests. Natg 19 (talk) 22:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 18 February 2024 

message: :Oppose the name "Isabella" is how the English Wikipedia recognizes women by the name "Isabel" in Spanish, like Isabella of Castile. Eliasparras (talk) 16:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Support with comment - I agree with the spirit and rationale of this nomination. However, as a Spanish speaker, I would also like to note that Isabel II can also refer to none other than Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, as seen here by Vogue México y Latinoamérica and here by El País.  I am happy to add a hatnote to the lede should this RM be successful. AndrewPeterT (talk) (contribs) 18:00, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the English-language Wikipedia, so the fact that Spanish speakers refer to the British queen by her exonym is irrelevant as far as this RM is concerned. I'm not convinced that a hatnote for the benefit of Spanish readers would be justified either. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Support per nom; Isabel's endonym is more common than her exonym in reliable English-language sources. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm pretty sure we all know what version of Wikipedia we're on. Guess we'll have to rename Felipe VI to Philip VI? AusLondonder (talk) 07:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: If it were up to me. I would have those pages changed to Philip VI of Spain, John Charles I of Spain, Alphonse XIII of Spain, etc. GoodDay (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: But no reliable sources call them by those names. The habit of translating monarchs' names into English died out at least a century ago. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, not sure if all editors have noticed... AusLondonder (talk) 15:31, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment - This is WP:JDLI, not a policy based argument. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 00:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are you pushing for this queen to be named "Isabel", when there's Isabella I of Castile? Why should we have such inconsistency? GoodDay (talk) 16:08, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

text: The fact  seriously thinks that we should move Felipe VI to Philip VI, something not supported by any English-language sources (even the very English Daily Mail uses Felipe) suggests their feelings on this matter are more personal, rather than policy-based. Will you be starting a RM at Felipe VI GoodDay? AusLondonder (talk) 15:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: No. GoodDay (talk) 15:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Comment - The reason I am proposing this move to "Isabel" is because it is her WP:COMMONNAME in English. Margaret I of Denmark is called "Margaret" in English, however Margrethe II is known as "Margrethe." It may be "inconsistent" to refer to Philip V of Spain as "Philip" but Felipe VI as "Felipe" but we do it anyway, because those are the names that they are primarily known by. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 18:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Not required here. GoodDay (talk) 20:56, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Comment - I'm not proposing this move because "Isabel II" is the more common name in Spanish. I'm proposing this because "Isabel II" is both the common name in English, and and more WP:PRECISE, as "Isabella II" is ambiguous with Isabella II of Jerusalem. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 11:51, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already mentioned in the lead that "Isabel" is the Spanish version of the name. Why isn't that good enough?  GoodDay (talk) 15:59, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

text: Relisting comment: Relisting for clearer consensus. BD2412 T 17:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

text: I've requested closure for this at Wikipedia:Closure_requests. Natg 19 (talk) 22:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey