Talk:Margaret of Valois

message: Removed the bit about Jeanne d'Albret and the shopping trip.  I am pretty sure this is Dumas, because I just read several articles on Jeanne d'Albert, and only one, in Bautz's Kirchenlexikon mentioned that there was a rumor at the time that she'd been poisoned.  apparently, Henry even ordered an autopsy, which revealed some kind of growth on one of her lungs -- this apparently strengthened the rumors. Still -- Jeanne isn't the subject of the article.
I'm a bit concerned about this article, as it's really more of a synopsis of the story in book and film, and really talks a lot about the events of the time, rather than Marguerite's place in them.  Is there anybody more interested who'd like to give this more of a focus on the actual subject? JHK
A publication date for her Memoirs is given as 1628 in the Ext. link. --07:50, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: In one of the bottom paragraphs it says she's homely, then in the next paragraph it says 'her beauty fading'. This seems like a contradiction, depending on what 'homely' is meant to convey in the preceding paragraph.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.157.213.241 (talk) 17:35, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Homely? In what sense? 

message: I've read on the wiki page for Francis Bacon that he and Marguerite fell madly in love with one another and enjoyed a passionate affair. Does anyone know if this was true? Contaldo80 (talk) 17:00, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Francis Bacon

message: There really should be something about the alleged incest between Margot ad her brothers. Whether true or not, it is much talked about in history. She herself is said to have admitted to her confessor that she had "slept" with her brothers; she accused them of incest herself, and it is believed to be true at least when it comes to her youngest brother, and possibly Henri III. I'm not going to meddle in that, but it should be adjusted sometime! Just to point it out! --85.226.45.179 (talk) 13:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I see now that even the French wiki-article mention this!--85.226.45.179 (talk) 13:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The incest between Margaret and his brothers is a slander spread by the Huguenot propaganda, after the night of St. Bartholomew, with the pamphlettes Le Reveil-Matin des François. This news has been widely believed and unfortunately it has been revived, because the sources have not been adequately controlled, even by today's historians (for example Leonie Frieda in her bestseller Catherine de Medici). The claim that Margaret spoke of incest with the brothers in her Memoirs is a false history. There is no reference to this in it. --Chevalier d'Éon (talk) 12:49, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incest 

message: Please note that a move closure is not an admin action and, except for the limited rationale applied in that closure, says nothing about policies in general. This move closure only says that sources and usage of Margaret of Valois vs Marguerite de Valois are divided and therefore the argument that we should look at other encyclopedias for guidance is persuasive. Obviously, if further research reveals that any one of these does not hold up, particularly if it is found that reliable sources largely refer to her as Marguerite de Valois, or if arguments in favor of an alternative title such as Marguerite of Valois are found convincing, then the move should (and must) be reconsidered. --RegentsPark (sticks and stones) 17:33, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comment on move closure

message: I heard a rumor that Margaret had a child with de Harlay. Does anybody know the child's name.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.148.14.53 (talk) 06:58, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  There are many doubts among historians about Margaret's ability to conceive children. The ambassadors of the time themselves were doubtful of the fact and were convinced that the queen was sterile. Later it was said that the child born of the extramarital affair between Margaret and Champvallon would be Louis de Vaux, who became a Capuchin friar with the name of Frére Ange. But there are numerous doubts about the truth of the fact, being the friar close to the family of Henriette d'Entragues and therefore involved in a series of intrigues against Henry IV of France, during the early seventeenth century. --Chevalier d'Éon (talk) 12:58, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: Child

message: The main portrait here looks to me rather strongly to be a portrait of Marie de' Medici, not Margaret. So what's the deal with that? john k (talk) 06:07, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  portrait 

message: I recently undid a change of Marguerite's portrait on the top of the page. The one in place now is from a much more credible source, has definitely been identified as a portrait of Marguerite and is the most used of her. Does anyone object? Meghana34 (talk) 01:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Which portrait to use? 

message: This section at the end of the lead should be clarified. It feels like Wiki is taking a point of view by calling her the "victim of a historiographic tradition", which is inappropriate as per WP:POV. It is also not a clear sentence; it seems to mean that she was mistreated by some historians but also seems to imply those historians were calling her beautiful and cultured. I would fix it myself, but I have no idea what the author is trying to say here.
 She has been a victim of a historiographic tradition that has demolished the importance of her actions in the political sphere of the era, to reinforce the dynastic transition from the Valois to the Bourbon, giving credit to libel and slander circulated on her account and created and handed down through the centuries the myth of a beautiful woman, cultured, nymphomaniac and incestuous.
Ikjbagl (talk) 20:41, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Ikjbagl: that paragraph sounds as though it was lifted practically verbatim from somewhere. Poor/incorrect translation is also an issue throughout, but without access to the sources there's nothing I can do to fix it. Cheers, Awien (talk) 17:25, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree about translation, which I also cannot fix. Pincrete (talk) 18:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I added in a note to this incipit an interesting article written by Moshe Sluhovsky of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a book by Cesarina Casanova professor of Modern History at the University of Bologna. --Chevalier d'Éon (talk) 11:02, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV issues / unclear wording at end of lead 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:42, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion