Talk:Fabiola of Belgium

message: Since Queen Fabiola is still alive, she should be at her regnal title, not her awkward and little known maiden name. john k 23:49, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: The picture of Queen Fabiola is from when she was younger. There are quite a lot of pictures of Fabiola online from the present era. Could someone with experience maybe upload a more up to date picture of Queen Fabiola? Just a little suggestion :) --PrincessAlice13 (talk) 21:28, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture Update 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Queen Sonja of Norway which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 11:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: All TV news shows here in Belgium have been re-arranged this evening to cope with Queen Fabiola's passing. She was regarded as the Belgian equivalent of the UK's Queen Mother and was greatly loved here. But her views on abortion were controversial (to say the least). Should we mention this in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.164.164.116 (talk) 19:57, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Queen Fabiola's legacy

message: What's the strange surname "de Aragón"? They're not Aragonese royalty, right? --YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 04:50, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: It is possible that the family is descended in the male line from one of the many Trastamara "bastards". Alonso de Aragón is a possible ancestor. At least two of his four sons had sons of their own. Surtsicna (talk) 17:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  "de Aragón" 

message: Why is the Ancestry section totally blank? Or is this a bug in the beta mobile version? --Thnidu (talk) 01:00, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Never mind, I see that there's some kind of table in the wiki code that isn't being displayed for me. It's a bug all right. --Thnidu (talk) 01:04, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ancestry? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Fabiola of Belgium. 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/20141206192831/http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/141205/queen-fabiola-belgiums-former-queen-dies-aged-86 to http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/afp/141205/queen-fabiola-belgiums-former-queen-dies-aged-86
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) 00:23, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

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. Unopposed RM. (non-admin closure)  Colonestarrice (talk) 16:33, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Queen Fabiola of Belgium →  – Fabiola is now deceased and the general practice for deceased consort per WP:CONSORTS is to refer to them by their birth name. I'm not sure the late Queen of the Belgians has achieved the same fame as Prince Albert, Empress Dowager Cixi, and Marie Antoinette, and so the general rule should apply to her. Векочел (talk) 05:19, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

text: Note: WikiProject Belgium has been notified of this discussion. Lennart97 (talk) 15:20, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 5 December 2021 

message: Queen consort of the belgians(1928-2014) Divyadirun 12 (talk) 03:36, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Queen Faibola of Belgium 

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 to alternate suggestion.  Andrewa (talk) 10:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Fabiola de Mora y Aragón →  – WP:CONSORTS says "Consorts who are native subjects of their spouses are often known by their maiden name or the title they held in their own right". Fabiola was not natively Belgian. Her maiden surname is also not very notable. I would also support a move to Fabiola of Belgium (or, alternatively of the Belgians). Other consorts have been named in this format, such as Marie of Romania (rather than Marie of Edinburgh) and Alexandra of Yugoslavia (rather than Alexandra of Greece and Denmark).--Estar8806 (talk) 03:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

text: That misconceived proposal went unchallenged, so the move was carried out as uncontested. If I'd noticed at the time, I'd have opposed it. She's primarily known as Belgium's queen and, as you note, we've got Marie of Romania, etc. While "Queen of the Belgians" is formally the title, WP:COMMONNAME applies, and most people have to be told that Belgium's royalty is formally titled "King/Queen of the Belgians". In addition, WP:CONSORTS expresses one general practice, which is that "Queen" is typically omitted; and Fabiola's husband is listed as Baudouin of Belgium, not Baudouin, King of the Belgians. So my !vote is for Fabiola of Belgium. Largoplazo (talk) 11:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 18 January 2023 

message: Some of this article's wording and that of The Independent is similar. It may be a backwards copyvio; alternatively, both are drawing from some third source, such as the official website of the Belgian monarchy. The obit dates from 2014 (of course), and some variation of (inexact quote) "reduced her duties to avoid overshadowing Paola" been in this [enwp] article since at least 2006. Given this, it is fair to make sure everyone's keeping watch for possible citogenesis—the obit is probably okay, as it probably went through The Independent fact checkers and editorial process, but better safe than sorry. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:40, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please be wary of possible [[citogenesis]] when editing