Talk:Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies

pro-Revolution bias in article

Seems like somebody with a major hard on for the French Revolution wrote this article.

"The intellectual Jacobin nobles who governed the Republic were convinced that the people needed of liberty and culture instead of bread and work."

errrr, what? So, apparently before the French death cult there was allegedly no culture in the Two Sicilies? What nonsense.

"Ferdinand sent an expedition composed of Calabrians, brigands, and gaol-birds, under Cardinal Ruffo, to reconquer the mainland kingdom. Ruffo, with the support of English artillery, the Church and the pro-Bourbons aristocracy, and above all the ignorance and poverty of the people, was completely successful"

Flat out calling the people "ignorant" because they did not prescribe to the godless, French Revolutionary Death Cult ideology is a bit much.

"His army and the lazzaroni headed by the bandit Fra Diavolo, committed nameless atrocities, which he honestly tried to prevent, and the Parthenopaean Republic collapsed. After few months King Ferdinand returned to the throne."

Quite unlike those saints the Revolutionaries and the horrible atrocities they commited over Europe like the genocide at Vendée? Perhaps it was the Revolutionaries and their modern champions of it who were the ignorant ones. - Vootarr (talk) 19:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

This is obviously EB 1911 text, and it just needs toning down a bit. You are misinterpreting things totally in thinking it is sympathetic to the French Revolution! What it is actually reflecting is the traditional patrician Protestant English view of then decaying Catholic Italy. Piccadilly (talk) 13:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite

(For future reference: the version that I'm referring to is here, in case the current version is substantially different.)

As noted above, the text carries some odd artifacts from the 1911 Britannica. It's tone is pretty clearly aimed at portraying this guy as sort of a pathetic, 2-bit dictator relying on the major empires in Europe to keep him in power. This may have been true, but it's not encyclopedic to say so. It could also certainly do with some expansion. The reference to Lord Nelson's mistress at the end of the French revolution section is particularly unclear. Cheers,--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Coin reference error

The gold coin is not depicting Ferdinando IV King of Naples, but Ferdinand I The Duke of Parma (his cousin). THis picture must be replaced with appropriate substitution or deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.162.123.24 (talk) 12:11, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

wrong kind of WP:BOLD

I hope someone can tell why the Issue table is all bold and correct it. —Tamfang (talk) 22:49, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ferdinand I of the Two Sicilies. 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://archive.is/20130410170030/http://www.carlodiborbone.com/ita/archiviostorico/stemma_e.htm to http://www.carlodiborbone.com/ita/archiviostorico/stemma_e.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

Mistake?

According this edition... "because his eldest son Philip had been excluded from succession due to illnesses and his second son Charles was heir to the Spanish throne"...

Charles IV of Spain was the second son of Charles III of Spain. I think the link is a mistake.--Gilwellian (talk) 07:01, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Wops! I read twice. I juyst misunderstood the reading, sorry! *blink*--Gilwellian (talk) 07:05, 30 August 2019 (UTC)