Talk:Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia

message: "his mother's reliance on the starets Grigori Rasputin to treat the disease helped bring about the end of the Romanov dynasty." 
This seems a rather bold and out-of-context statement for an introduction. I suggest that it is clarified extensively and backed up by adequate sources.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by HenryCorp (talk • contribs) 19:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Out of context statement

message: Alexis (and his sister Maria) are the only members of the family that where not buried in the 1998 funerals. The government and the Romanov family recognize that. http://romanovfundforrussia.org/family/ce.html
The Wiki article on Nicholas II states that the daughter's remains recovered with Alexei are those of Grand Duchess Tatiana, not Maria, but that information has not yet been transferred to this page. Thoughts? Sdsures (talk) 21:29, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Burial place

message: This is quite an exercise in speculative history. RodC 23:26, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: This

message: I'm not sure--the title Tsarevitch had gone out of use in the 1700s, and Alexei would have been known as Naslednik Tsesarevitch Alexei, or, The Heir Tsesarevitch, but not Tsarevitch. Google defines Tsesarevich as: "literally, "son of the tsesar") is the term for a male heir apparent, the full title was Heir Tsesarevich ("Naslednik Tsesarevich"), informally abbreviated in Russia to The Heir, 'Naslednik'"
So should this be moved, or stay here? Morhange 21:07, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Article shouldn't be moved, but the title of Alexey must be corrected. Tsesarevich (not tsarevich!) was his official title after all. (ouital77 01:46, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Tsarevich is the most widely used title in English and is the correct spelling for this article. Just as his sisters' articles refer to them as "grand duchesses" instead of the more accurate translation "grand princess," Alexei's title must remain "Tsarevich" in his article. I have reverted your changes. --Bookworm857158367 00:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I am sorry, but this is just a wrong title. He was never styled like this in his lifetime (officially). Do whatever you want, but for the sake to precision and accuracy, you should indicate the basic difference between the two titles - "tsarevich" is an unofficial title for any male offspring of an emperor/tsar, while the "tsesarevich" is an official title for the Heir Apparent. So, if N. II would have had any other male children, every one of them would have been called (popularly, not officially) "tsarevich", while only Alexey, as the first-born son, could have been styled as "Tsesarevich". A few letters, but a world of difference. (ouital77 17:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an English-language article; the only usage I've ever seen in English-language articles is "Tsarevich" or "Czarevich." If the longer, more precise Russian title is included, it should be in the body of the article, not the title, with most references continuing to be to "Tsarevich." It must remain as it is. --Bookworm857158367 17:05, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

text: He was canonized. He, his parents and his sisters were all canonized in the Russian Orthodox Church as Passion-Bearers. Ikons of the family show the entire family as saints. I'm going to remove that sentence. Morhange 00:11, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

text: Czarevich or Tsarevich are the commonly used titles in English. The article title must stay Tsarevich, according to Wikipedia convention. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 19:03, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I understand the popular use of tsarevich but it is still inaccurate. The best compromise is to put a footnote explaining the actual title, which I went ahead and added.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 01:41, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I see no trouble with using the title Tsesarevich instead of Tsarevich because he was the heir, and heirs are titled Tsesarevich not Tsarevich. But this seems beside the point. He was actually either Tsar Alexei - as his father abdicated the throne and Alexei became Tsar - or if you accept that his father can amend an abdication, which seems unlikely as he had no authority to do this once he'd abdicated, then as the son of a Tsar (and no longer heir) he would be Tsarevich Alexei. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It needs to be Tsesarevich or something else but not Tsarevich. Wikipedia is supposed to be ENCYCLOPEDIA, therefore, strict attention should be made to factual accuracy. This "well more people know them as this" is bull. They can read the article and quickly become enlightened. Tsesarevich is not particularly hard to pronounce either. If you're interested in an article about Russian history, you probably won't have a problem saying the word. So silly. Wikimandia (talk) 03:20, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This is the English Wikipedia. "Tsesarevich" is not an English word; "Tsarevich" is. - Nunh-huh 03:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL! And in which region of jolly old England did "tsarevich" originate from? They're both Russian words. Wikimandia (talk) 05:04, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The test is as follows: if a word is in an English dictionary, it's an English word. This is not an exotic concept; it's used by copyeditors to help decide which words to italicize if their style guide calls for putting foreign words in italics. "Tsarevich" is an English word because it appears in English dictionaries, and "Tsesarevich" is a foreign word because it doesn't.  Your "LOL", therefore, is not only inappropriate in civil discourse, but wrong. The origins of a word don't determine whether it's been incorporated as English vocabulary.  - Nunh-huh 06:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL again. Why do you say it's uncivil when you make me laugh, which is so joyful for one to do? Someone should tell those people at Merriam-Webster and Harper-Collins to take out that Not English word out of their dictionaries! Somebody, hurry, for the good of humanity and all that is pure and English! Wikimandia (talk) 06:51, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Your incivility is clearly apparent to anyone who can read. - Nunh-huh 08:00, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The "civility" of users have little with the discussion, but nevertheless your knowledge of proper conduct has inspired me to tip my fedora in your general direction. DJ Phylactery (talk) 20:47, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Tsesarevitch Alexei? 

message: Is the August 12 date correct? Russia is using the Julian Calendar, so this date might be wrong.
Sandy June 05:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Russia is NOT using Juian Calendar. -- tasc wordsdeeds 05:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Russia was using the Julian calendar when Alexei was born (the changeover to Gregorian occurred when 31 January 1918 was followed by 14 February 1918, though parts of the country lagged behind. So the August 12 date was not correct; Alexei was born 30 July 1904 (OS) = 12 August 1904 (NS). - Nunh-huh 16:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Birth date

message: The reason the Imperial Family were ACTUALLY Assassinated/Murdered was a Legal one :   An execution, by definition, is done by the established, recognised government.  The accused ALSO must receive Due Process of Law.
The Bolsheviks were usurping insurgents attempting to overthrow the recognised Provisional Government duely established.  Add to this, the Imperial Family received NO Due Process of Law. Finally, Yurovsky implemented RUSE/Lies to induce the Imperial Family to go down to the Cellar room (under the guise of taking a photo of the Family).   Ergo :  The Imperial family were ASSASSINATED due to the insurgent/usurping character of the Bolsheviks, and because the Family received NO Process of Law, but instead were surprised with a squad of non-Russians given orders to shoot the Family.  When such ruse & surprise are used against a political target, that is tantamount to Assassination.   Maj. Jesse Carnes (talk) 20:25, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Albeit with considerable reluctance, I must agree with the above.  Kevin Nelson 06:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There is some question over whether the Ural Soviet was following the orders of Lenin or decided to kill the family on its own, which would put the legality of the killings in question. There's also the question of whether the government itself was a legal entity. At the time Russia was in a state of civil war, between various White Army forces and the Red Army. I have seen it referred to as execution, assassination, and murder. I am extremely reluctant to label the killing of a thirteen year old boy a legal execution when I don't think it was. A politically-motivated murder, yes. --Bookworm857158367 14:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

text: Again -- he was a deathly ill 13-year-old boy, without personal power to commit such alleged crimes. Aside from that, there are the arguments made above, which still hold. Do not revert this page again without consensus. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 03:59, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

text: and he deserved to be shot because of that? Did his teenage sisters also deserve to be shot? Surtsicna (talk) 18:04, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

text: Saying that the "whole family needed to be executed for the tens of millions of dead men, women and children they were responsible for" is like saying that all the Germans in the world should be executed for brutally torturing and killing up to 17 million innocent people. This kind of comments should be removed immediately, as it is not productive. Surtsicna (talk) 19:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murdered vs Executed 

message: The article has passed sections 3), 5) and 6) and needs corrections on sections 1), 2) and 4).
Overall, the assessment is ON HOLD
The assessment is as follows :
1) Written Quality - Well written but the quotes need more prominence as they run into the text. 
2) Factually Accurate - Sergey Egornov, Alexei Poutziato, Joseph Veres and Vassili Filatov are all non-existent links. The imposters need to be separated from the "Death" section and put into their own separate section. Add a sentence pointing out the the futility of the imposters trying to impersonate Tsarevich Alexis, the monarchy was so discredited that even if the Royal family had survived, there was no support for the the restoration of a Tsar Alexis, see here for the reference
.
3) Coverage - the article is broad in coverage and stays focused on the topic.
4) Neutrality - Some of the language used to describe Alexis as a "naughty boy" , the half paragraph starting "At age seven,,,,,," betrays a gushing sentimentality. It needs to be re-written and the language toned down, don't use a direct quote, just indirectly describe his naughty behaviour. Tsarevich Alexis was not just a boy, he was the heir to the Autocratic Romanovs. The language needs to be more neutral.
5) Stability - Article is relatively stable though I see you have had acts of vandalism by unregistered ISP users. No major edit conflicts.
6) Photos - Good use of photos. Free public domain photos are used. No fair use photos.
Corrections, as specified above, must be carried out within seven days. Contact me when they have been carried out and I will re-assess.
Tovojolo 22:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Status

message: The family was Russian by nationality but ethnically diverse. Should we add that to this information?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.51.64.209 (talk) 01:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Ethnicity

message: He was the Tsesar-evich rather than just a Tsar-evich. He may have become a Tsarevich after his father's abdication, but the Wikipedia article on Edward VIII still uses his regnal title rather than his post-abdication title Duke of Windsor. I don't think the title Tsarevich was even officially used for children & grandchildren of the Tsars, but rather Grand Duke/Grand Prince, with the heir being Tsesarevich. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 11:52, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article Title 

message: There is no clear reference to the Tsarevich having become Tsar upon the abdication of his father.101.98.74.13 (talk) 21:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because it's not clear that he did. His father's two abdications and their questionable validity seem to be clearly referenced. - Nunh-huh 04:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tsar 

message: Substituted at 18:07, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia. 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/20091012020300/http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2009/1008/2? to http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2009/1008/2?
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:00, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia. 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:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2009/1008/2
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080501043005/http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080430/ap_on_re_eu/russia_czar_s_family to https://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080430/ap_on_re_eu/russia_czar_s_family
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070206173420/http://www.serfes.org/royal/miracleprayers.htm to http://www.serfes.org/royal/miracleprayers.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050824094901/http://www.struggler.org/GlorificationOfTheRoyalFamily.html to http://www.struggler.org/GlorificationOfTheRoyalFamily.html
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) 06:29, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia. 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/20160101021756/http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=220457&p=11 to http://www.litmir.net/br/?b=220457&p=11
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080528192716/http://parus.pravoverie.ru/Pantuhin.doc to http://parus.pravoverie.ru/Pantuhin.doc
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) 20:53, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia. 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/20090226012732/http://nors-australia.home-business-host.com/aboutus.html to http://nors-australia.home-business-host.com/aboutus.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230004230/http://www.angelfire.com/pa/ImperialRussian/royalty/russia/aleksei.html to http://www.angelfire.com/pa/ImperialRussian/royalty/russia/aleksei.html
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) 06:20, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: References 47 to 50 are dead. So the sentence: Alexei became one of the first Boy Scouts in Russia., is now unreferenced. --AMPERIO (talk) 19:36, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead references 

message: Since Alexei was killed after his father, in the minutes between his father's death and his own, wouldn't he have technically been (very briefly) the legitimate pretender to the throne and head of the dynasty?Aumnamahashiva (talk) 12:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The answer is yes according to some people, and no according to other people. You won't find an answer that is universally acknowledged to be correct.  When Nicholas abdicated, he also purported to abdicate on behalf of his son, leaving Nicholas's brother Michael as next in line. But the Pauline Laws were meant to take the succession out of the hands of the tsars. It's not clear that the tsar can abdicate on behalf of someone else, even if they are his minor son. Other people will say that the tsardom continued after the death of Nicholas, as no one had the right to abolish it. So you will find people who come down on various sides, and no one with the authority to decide which alternative is correct. Some of this is discussed on this talk page above. - Nunh-huh 12:53, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Status at death? 

message: There's a paper that was published in the American Journal of Hematology that examined Alexei's symptoms from a modern perspective. The author concluded that Alexei's symptoms are a much better description of hemolytic anemia. Should this be mentioned in the article? I'm not sure whether it would be undue weight since the majority of independant sources agree that Alexei had hemophillia. Clovermoss (talk) 20:43, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's an article by an obsessed reporter with no particular medical expertise. His "theory" that Alexei didn't have hemophilia came into being because he was an avid supporter of a man who pretended to be the adult Alexei who had miraculously survived the family's slaughter, grown up, moved to Canada and married. But in order to "be" Alexei the uncomfortable fact that the man didn't have hemophilia had to be explained away with hand-waving and medically illiterate fantasies about what other diseases could have produced Alexei's symptoms. God knows how this got published in an actual journal; but there's no serious question that [1] Alexei didn't survive and move to Canada, or the [2] Alexei had anything other than hemophilia B. The specific genetic mutation that caused Alexei's hemophilia has been identified through actual testing , so there's no reason to include disproven and bizarre theories about the nature of his disease. - Nunh-huh 00:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Ah, then it's not reliable and covered by WP:FRINGE. I'm wondering how this got published in an actual journal then, too. I was hoping since it was a journal article that it might have some validaty to it, but that doesn't seem to be the case. Clovermoss (talk) 00:48, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  Yeah, it's the fringiest :) - Nunh-huh 00:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:   Taking a second look at the title of the article, I should have been a bit more skeptical. Argueing that a faith healer who had a disreputation more than 100 years agos for his beliefs might actually be wrong usually isn't a good sign in the strength of your own arguments. Clovermoss (talk) 01:01, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hemophillia/hemolytic anemia? 

message: is why the current short description for the article is "Last heir apparent of the last imperial family of Russia". Like anything else on Wikipedia, if another editor thinks this can be improved, please do so. Clovermoss (talk) 01:49, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Short description 

message: Hi! :), I know there are controversies as to whether he was executed or murdered, but given the fact that "Murdered children" is already there, shouldn't that category be there too? Agree or disagree? I respect every POV. :) --CoryGlee (talk) 11:05, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Shouldn't we add "Russian murder victims" category? 

message: The title of the article goes "Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia". Instead of "Tsarevich" (the third word in the title of the article) should be "Tsesarevich"", isn't it? Is there any way to correct the title of an article? Thanks and best wishes, Sergeismart (talk) 21:55, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, articles can be moved to other titles. But the title isn't wrong. This is the English Wikipedia, not the Russian one. If we were writing in Russian, a case could be made for Tsesarevich. But we're writing in English, which has a word "tsarevich" which means "the eldest son of an emperor of Russia", and does not have a word "tsesarevich". -Nunh-huh 03:33, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, you're using Wikipedia as a reference for the existence of "Tsesarevich" in English? You need a better reference... - Nunh-huh 00:00, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Wouldn't the English version technically be "Czarevich?" And, I mean, at the end of the day, all of these words derive from Russian, so what makes Tsarevich any more or less English than Tsesarevich? Piratesswoop (talk) 02:13, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Generally, a word that's been incorporated into an authoritative (printed) English language dictionary - one with an editorial board that makes informed decisions - is considered an English word. That's how you determine whether or not to italicize something as a foreign term or not, and which spelling is preferred, and which are variants. The New Oxford American Dictionary, for example, has the entry: "Tsarevich (also czarevich or czarevitch): noun, historical, the eldest son of an emperor of Russia."  So the main spelling is "tsarevich", and there are two other variants also given. The fact that it's an entry tells you it's English. The fact that "tsesarevich" has no entry is an indication it's not English. -Nunh-huh 04:30, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

text: "The titles of members of the Imperial Family are quite diverse. Their difference is determined by the degree of closeness of kinship to the Emperor and the right to succession. The heir to the throne, to whatever degree of kinship with the emperor he may be, bears the titles of the Heir, Tsesarevich, Grand Duke, Imperial Highness; His wife - the titles of the Tsesarevna (since 1841), Grand Duchess, Imperial Highness".
This is basically in line with the information presented by the aforementioned "Tsesarevich" and "Tsarevich" Wikipedia articles - namely, that "Tsesarevich" and "Tsarevich" are not the different spellings of the same word, but rather two words with different meanings. Now to the last point mentioned, namely to the fact that "The New Oxford American Dictionary has the entry: "Tsarevich - the eldest son of an emperor of Russia". I myself have the Second Edition of Oxford Dictionary of English and my Dictionary also has only one entry which is "tsarevich (also czarevich, tsarevish), noun, historical, the eldest son of an emperor of Russia". This, in my opinion, might very well be a shortcoming on the part of the editorial boards of those Dictionaries - they probably just didn't delve deep enough into the issue. But the historical documents (namely the mentioned "Statute of the Imperial Family") as well as the "History" paragraph of this Wikipedia article state that since 1797 the term "Tsesarevich" was in use when defining the title of the heir apparent to the Russian Throne. To conclude: the title of the article "Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia" should, in my opinion, be changed to "Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsesarevich of Russia". Very best wishes, Sergeismart (talk) 14:45, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

text: Yes, we know that's your opinion. But at Wikipedia, we use reliable sources (two, in this case: The New Oxford American Dictionary and the Second Edition of the Oxford Dictionary of English) rather than the opinions of Wikipedians. - Nunh-huh 19:38, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

text: I admire your desire for accuracy. But we can only follow the reliable sources! - Nunh-huh 22:40, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  A possible mistake in the title of the article 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Nicholas Alexandrovich, Tsesarevich of Russia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 22:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress