Talk:Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna of Russia

message: Shouldn't you guys be discussing that ancestry table over here?  What's it all got to do with me? john k 11:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: older entries

message: This article looks horrible....the photos are throwing off paragraphs, etc. and causing un-deeded spaces. There are way to many photos.
--Mrlopez2681 04:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you're right and I've removed most of the photos from Olga's article and from the other grand duchesses' articles. Rearrange the ones that are left if you want. Layout has never been my strong point. --Bookworm857158367 07:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Good God 

message: The image top right in the article (Olgachair.jpg) will be deleted from wikicommons in 7 days because it lacks a source and has an obsolete tag. The image I put in its place is labelled as Nicholas and Olga by the Beinecke collection. If you wish to continue using the image you've selected instead, you need to go to wikicommons and update the tags and source data. DrKiernan 17:27, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The photo labeled Olgachair is a portrait from the 1913 Tercentary and was published on postcards in numerous countries prior to World War I. It's definitely in the public domain. The photo that you uploaded was incorrectly labeled by the Beinecke Library. It is definitely of Tatiana and not of Olga. I also have seen the image reproduced several times elsewhere and labeled as Tatiana and Nicholas. Take a look at the other portraits of the grand duchesses and it's easy to identify them. --Bookworm857158367 18:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good, 'cause it's a much better picture. I've updated the wikicommons files with your information. DrKiernan 19:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: Well written, well referenced. Only issue is the two-line section (Rumors of survival) which should probably be folded into the section ahead of it, or expanded to discuss the veracity of the claims. - Mocko13 13:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and folded the "Rumors of survival" section into the section about "Captivity and death" and also added a line about how historians discount Marga Boodts' claim.--Bookworm857158367 17:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Passed GA. Good work and congratulations. - Mocko13 15:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

text: I like the article and its deserving of FA but i'm suprised that the section regarding her death merely says she was killed. How? WikipedianProlific(Talk) 16:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The assassins told the family they were about to die, Olga attempted to make the sign of the cross, and she was fired upon. She was shot and bayoneted to death, like the others in the family. An examination of her skull indicated that she was shot in the head. According to one account, she was killed in the initial volley because she was standing slightly behind her mother. According to another account she and her sister Tatiana hugged one another and were screaming and crying when Tatiana was shot in front of her. Screaming and fighting, Olga was kicked violently across the floor and shot in the head. The guards may have found it hard to distinguish between the four girls, so it isn't clear who was who in the different accounts. However it happened, it was brutal and violent and she was undoubtedly terrified in the final seconds of her life. In writing this, I preferred to focus on her life and the attributes that were considered for her canonization. The graphic details didn't seem necessary. --Bookworm857158367 23:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Review 

message: In 1900, the Old Style calender fell behind another day, so Olga's birthday is more accurately celebrated on the 16th of November, not the 15th.
Clockworkgirl21 08:36, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Olga's birthdate 

message: Ever since 1900, it is the 16th! The 15th is incorrect!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkgirl21 (talk • contribs) 05:48, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're wrong. Going by the date she was born is correct. Please stop changing it back. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 22:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Who keeps changing Olga's birthdate back to the 15th? 

message: (Sorry, I can't seem to reply on the same thread.) The old style calender is 13 days behind the new style. She was born November 3 old style, so it would be November 16 new style. Celebrating it on the 15th is a day too early.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.1.1.150 (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Again, it's correct to go by the date she was born. Stop changing it. I went by the date it was celebrated when she was actually born. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 17:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  No, it's the 16th 

message: The Romanovs celebrated Olga's birthday on the 16th themselves after 1900. You can't forget the correction day. It still lines up to the 16th.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkgirl21 (talk • contribs) 03:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  birthday 

message: As I have noted in the edit summary, Olga is less well known than her sister Grand Duchess Anastasia due to almost a century of speculation about the survival of the imperial family. During her lifetime, Olga was better known. However, Anastasia was the one assumed to have survived, so her name is the one everyone knows now. For that reason, it's reasonable to state that Olga is the sister of the famous Grand Duchess Anastasia, who is famous due to those survival stories. This article is a Featured Article, which passed the FA review with that statement in the lead. At the moment, there is no proof that Anastasia's body has been found and identified. Tests are being conducted on remains found near Ekaterinburg last summer that are probably Anastasia's. When an announcement is made to that effect, it will be appropriate to include a qualifier in the lead of this article saying she was "falsely" rumored to have survived. Until then, it is best to leave it as it currently is. Please do not alter that information, which is currently correct. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 16:45, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The legend that grew up around Grand Duchess Anastasia has everything to do with the fame of the Romanovs. It wasn't only Anna Anderson, it was also the other folks who are listed in the article entitled Romanov claimants. Calling her the sister of the famous Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia is hardly inaccurate. The article (and the other Romanov articles) explains in great detail the tale of their lives, the discovery of the remains in the 1990s and in August 2007 and the testing that is currently being conducted. Nothing is inaccurate here. Russian scientists believe the recently discovered remains are Maria and Alexei; British scientists identified the two missing bodies as Anastasia and Alexei. Their reasons why are also covered extensively in the articles. The fact remains that two of the bodies have still not been conclusively identified. When they do make that announcement, it might be appropriate to refer to "false" claims. Until then, it's not. Finnegan has an ax to grind, but in this case he is simply wrong-headed. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 04:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: However, rather than carry on yet another edit war with Finnegan over said ax, I have rewritten the lead and trust that he will now leave it alone. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 04:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Olga's fame

message: So please stop changing them.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clockworkgirl21 (talk • contribs) 02:20, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  The admin told me I can add the new birthdates to the body 

message: I would really like to know why Nicholas' girls were not already married or in the process of being married. They were all of marriageable age during the time of their unfortunate deaths. Indeed had they been out of the country, or the palace atleast, their lives may have been spared. ere their parents trying to hold onto them for some unseen reason? One never hears of any romantic interests any of them ever had.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.220.13.195 (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps because of Alexei's poor health. Olga wasn't officially in line for the throne, but her father, as an autocrat, could easily have changed Paul I's laws if his only son had died. So, as her brother's health flickered, one moment Olga was a non-heir who could marry anyone of reasonably high status, the next she was a potential future ruler of Russia whose marriage would be a matter of national importance and whose husband would have to live in Russia. How many bachelors were acceptable in both situations and appealing to Olga herself? Ariadne55 (talk) 21:50, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Another reason the eldest girls weren't married is that it was deemed inappropriate since Russia was at war. After 1914 all such plans were put on hold. I recall reading that the Tsar and Tsarina were also too protective of their daughters to allow them to marry at a very young age. Hence Olga was neither married nor betrothed at the outbreak of the War despite being of marriagable age. 128.232.252.236 (talk) 19:30, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Marriages 

message: How is Nicholas II the last autocrat of Russia?  He was the last monarch, but the Soviet state was an autocracy even if it wasn't a monarchy.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.126.178 (talk) 17:59, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Last Autocrat

message: I have tried several times to add an external link to a very in-depth biography of Olga and her sisters which I thought may be of interest to anyone reading the article. Each time, I have discovered that the link has been removed just a few hours later. I was wondering if anyone could enlighten me as to why this is? Does anyone have a particular objection to the biography in question or is it that I am making some kind of error? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks, SilverWoodIntern (talk) 10:38, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The pages you are linking to have been removed in the past from all of the Grand Duchess articles. I don't think they are a necessary addition. If there is anything new in any of said biographies that isn't included in the Wikipedia article, it would be appropriate to include it and then cite the biography as a reference along with the page number the way the other references are cited. That's the best way to include them. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 14:43, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  External Links 

message: Went googling thru images and happen to come across these photos of Olga and Tatiana in nurse uniform (http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7328/10468529845_cecc4875c8_o.jpg). Their posture is identical in two of the pictures. Whoever made these images shown above cropped them and altered the background. The image caption, "nurse's uniform in a formal portrait", is obviously false. 220.255.171.198 (talk) 03:07, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly fake photos 

message: Substituted at 16:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Why is she "of Russia" and not "of All the Russias"? --173.90.70.242 (talk) 21:03, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Title and Style 

message: I am an OTRS volunteer. Based on OTRS ticket  initiated by the family of the subject, I have removed two unsourced sentences from this article that the family insists are untrue (diffs ). The sentences seemed gossipy and subjective, and because they were unsourced, I agreed that the quality of the article is not reduced by the absence of these sentences. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:01, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I have also removed another gossipy sentence that was unsourced, but  has restored it.  I don't have access to the source you claim includes this information. If you do, would you quote the relevant passage here? The OTRS correspondent also objects to asserting that Olga "fell in love" with Pavel Voronov, but I have not removed that, explaining to the correspondent that this is sourced to a notable historian and even quotes Olga's own words that demonstrate she felt at least affection or fondness, if not love. ~Anachronist (talk) 15:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The books I have are packed away and it’s been a number of years since I worked on this article. What I do recall is that more than one of the biographies mentioned that a marriage was discussed with the Romanian heir and there was discussion about other possible matches and during this time period she had crushes/interest in different officers that she met. Her immediate family all died in 1918 and other relatives didn’t have a great deal of contact with her in the years prior to that. The biographies are listed under references. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 01:22, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That's very different from saying she "fell in love" with several different officers. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:06, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

text: There were three mentioned that the author regarded as serious, including two during the War. I think they are listed in the article itself.  Her sister Tatiana had her share of suitors as well.  It isn’t technically incorrect. The definition of “several” is “more than two but not many.” None of the biographers implied that the romances went very far or that the Grand Duchess Olga was ever likely to marry any of them, but I think “falling in love” is accurate. At least some of them seem to have returned her feelings. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 11:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested edits via OTRS

message: There seems to be a dispute over the terminology to use for the killings of the Imperial family. I can find literary  sources referring to it as both murder and execution. In the case of the five children and the servants, two under the age of 18, I argue for the term murder or perhaps state sanctioned murder. In one sense, it was “a state-sanctioned killing” and, according to Lenin’s people, a punishment for a crime by the Tsar and perhaps the Tsarina. The children were guilty due to bloodlines only. Bookworm857158367 (talk) 18:43, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Shooting children is not execution, which as Bookworm says, suggests punishment for a crime; under any jurisdiction, they lacked culpability and it was preventative only. I strongly supporting calling it what it was: murder. As a side note, the Tsarina was seen as equally culpable for the perceived neglect and lack of focus on state affairs, in that respect both her and her husband were certainly executed. But the children and servants were murdered. Ceoil (talk) 19:32, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Execution vs. murder 

message: I reviewed the article for the Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/2004–2009 drive. The following problems were found;
* The lead doesn't adequately summarise the article, it is too short and sections, for example, Rasputin and her early life aren't mentioned
* Paragraph 4 and 8 of her appearance section aren't referenced
* The Rasputin section contains a wall of text which needs splitting into paragraphs
* Paragraph 1 of the early adulthood section has no references
* The captivity section has a citation needed tag
Desertarun (talk) 22:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:   Wikipedia:Unreviewed featured articles/2020/2004–2009