Talk:Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedily deleted because... no comment on this users status at WP but the subject seems to be reported by WP:RS and the single editor is due to it's newness --LaserLegs (talk) 18:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

There are very solid reasons for why we do not allow blocked and banned users to edit the encyclopedia. This page is a three sentence micro-stub. I see no compelling reason why we should be making an exception here for a sock of an editor who has announced that they have been globally locked. -Ad Orientem (talk) 18:52, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: Would expanding the page resolve the CSD? Any other editors would have created the page given that her death was picked up by the wider media less than 24 hour ago according to Google News search. I also have searched through the sister wikipedia sites and found a stable version at the French counterpart, fr:Marie-Thérèse de Bourbon-Parme, which can be translated here as well.robertsky (talk) 19:29, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Ad Orientem: Have updated the article here. robertsky (talk)

Thank you for rescuing the article Robertsky. - Indefensible (talk) 21:22, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

@Indefensible: You are welcome. It's my pleasure. robertsky (talk) 02:46, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

"Royal"

Currently, the article states that Maria Teresa is the "first royal" to die of COVID-19. I understand that many reliable sources say this. However, Maria Teresa is not a member of a royal family. She is the daughter of the Carlist pretender to the Spanish throne. Her title of "Princess" is not recognized by the Spanish monarchy. Wikipedia's article on the Spanish royal family and the Spanish royal family's official website [1] identify the same six people as being the entirety of the Spanish royal family: the king and queen, their two children, and the king's parents (his father is the former king, having abdicated in favor of his son). The royal family's official family tree at [2] shows 19th-Century kings Carlos IV and his son Fernando VII; it does not even show Carlos's second son, Infante Carlos, from whom Maria Teresa is descended. I could write in the article that she is not a member of the royal family and cite the royal family's official website, but I worry that it could be considered original research or synthesis. So, with the understanding that many reliable sources report her to be a "royal," at least in the context of dying of COVID-19, I am asking folks to help me look for reliable sources that explicitly state that Maria Teresa is not considered a "royal" personage, especially in the context of COVID-19 and her death, so that a competing viewpoint can be added to the aticle. I think it's likely that sources published in Spain may exist, but I don't speak Spanish. --DavidK93 (talk) 03:08, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The famously critical Finns do it. The yellow rag newspaper Ilta-Sanomat in Finland had corrected its newspiece to be [3] That's because someone who is nasty, made them to correct it into today's edition. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC) In the current version, Ilta-Sanomat 30.3.2020 says essentially the followng things: María Teresa belongs to the Bourbon-Parma noble family. it is an error that María Teresa has been called as cousin of Espana king Felipe VI, and error that called her Espana princess. In reality, María Teresa belong to the karlist Bourbon-Parma lineage that rivalled with the ruling lineage of Bourbon about the power. Carlist lineage are not princes and princesses in Spain. the real political leadership of Espana does not recognize (nor accept) the karlist pretensions, nor is it accepted by the royal house of Spain. María Teresa is not princess de Espana. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:29, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I mean, if you check out that ancestry, she comes from the 'official' line of the Spanish royal family, too. And the French. And the Portuguese. And the Dutch. And that's only a few generations. She's the current King's cousin, which is close enough to be considered part of the family. Kingsif (talk) 03:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that she "comes from the official line of the Spanish royal family." If your're referring to the fact that she is descended from a previous King of Spain, well, a lot of people are descended from royalty; they are not all royal themselves. This is why monarchies establish rules about who is actually considered "royal" or a member of the "royal family," usually being limited to two or three generations of descent from a monarch, sometimes with requirements of male-line descent, especially in later generations. And in the case of Maria Teresa, I don't believe her title of "Princess" comes from her descent from a recognized Spanish monarch, but rather directly from her father's title as "King" in the Carlist tradition. The French and Portuguese monarchies have both been dissolved, in 1848 (the kingdom, rather than the empire) and 1910, respectively; no living person is a princess of France or of Portugal. And her descent from both those monarchies is through cadet branches (if you're talking about her great-grandparents Louise Marie Thérèse of France and Miguel I of Portugal), which may confer nobility if a noble title was granted to the founder, but not royalty. I couldn't find any information about her descending from the royal family of the Netherlands, although her brother married into it. Can you elaborate on your identification of Maria Teresa as a "cousin" of the King Felipe VI of Spain? Assuming the ancestries in the Wikipedia articles for Felipe and for Maria Teresa are accurate, none of Felipe's parents, grandparents, or great-grandparents are ancestors of Maria Teresa, so the closest they could be related is third cousins (or a lower degree of cousin, if as many times removed as the difference). Or perhaps you are repeating the claims in articles, again reliably sourced but maddeningly uncritical, that she is his cousin. Further, being a family member to a monarch, as a person, does not make one a member of a royal family; after all, half of a monarch's family members will be through the parent that is a consort rather than of royal birth, and every generation you go back again halves this proportion. (For example, articles referring to Lord Ivar Mountbatten), Queen Elizabeth II's third cousin once removed, as the first gay or first same-sex-married member of the British royal family were at least consistently scrupulous in qualifying that he is a member of the "extended royal family" or of the "British monarch's extended family.") In any event, I'm not trying to prove to you or to anyone that Maria Teresa is not a royal. I'm asking for help in finding reliable sources that state that she is not. --DavidK93 (talk) 05:04, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Adding onto this, I had a look at the family tree and it appears that their closest common ancestor is Charles IV (king during the Napoleonic wars about 200 years ago), which would make Maria Teresa and Felipe VI fifth cousins, once removed. They are barely related. Snkn179 (talk) 14:04, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Marie-Therese here is not a direct descendant of the first carlist pretender, don Carlos. Funny thing indeed. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

As DavidK93 said above, Maria Teresa's family are Carlists, pretenders whose royal claims split from reality about 200 years ago, and specifically of a faction that believes that her father Xavier ("Don Javier") was the King of Spain. (See his article for pages and pages of drama, if not clarity, about how his status was used.) Some people called her the "Red Princess" as a nickname, because she supported socialists, but that wasn't official either. Here's what I've found just in death articles from mainstream Spanish media, which takes a far more nuanced stance about Maria Teresa's status:

• ABC, 3rd-highest-circulation newspaper in Spain, in "¿Quién era María Teresa de Borbón-Parma, la «princesa roja»?": (roughly translated) "some called [her] the 'red princess' and others mistakenly considered her cousin to the King of Spain. María Teresa was, in fact, the daughter of the Carlist pretender to the Crown of Spain and it would be necessary to go back two centuries ago to find a common ancestor with Don Felipe" (current King of Spain)
• El País, 2nd-highest-circulation newspaper in Spain, in "Muere María Teresa de Borbón y Parma, prima del rey Felipe, por coronavirus" starts with (translated) "María Teresa de Borbón y Parma, cousin of King Felipe VI, also known as the 'red princess'", without calling her by any actual title; later refers to her family as "signs as 'SAR'" ("royal highness") instead of actually referring to them as royal; and then says "the daughter of the then-infante Francisco Javier de Borbón y Braganza, prince of Parma and Plasencia, who claimed to be the legitimate heir to the Spanish crown, and Magdalena de Borbón Busset."
• La Vanguardia, 4th-highest-circulation newspaper in Spain, in "María Teresa de Borbón-Parma, la princesa roja": (roughly translated) "member of the renewed branch of Carlism ... member of the Carlist branch that for decades maintained the Carlist claim to the throne of Spain. Princess María Teresa, a title she never used, was born on July 28, 1933, the daughter of Francisco Javier de Borbón y Braganza, prince of Parma and Plasencia, and his wife, Magdalena de Borbón Busset ... Despite the fact that some media have described María Teresa de Borbón-Parma as the King's cousin, in reality their common origins date back to Louis XIV."

--Closeapple (talk) 06:11, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

• I did read about her when looking for more non-obit sources, and honestly, she's closely and recently enough related to southern European monarchs that it's fair to describe her as royal. Like, even some of Queen Elizabeth II's grandchildren don't have the title prince/princess, which even Spanish media (why did you think it was necessary to explain the popularity of them; for most people, they're at least aware of El País, and can google or click on wikilinks - for me, I lived in Spain, thanks) acknowledges Maria Teresa was born with. A royal duchy is still a royal family, in any case. I think you're being overly-narrow with the definition - but I would encourage adding more detail about it in general. I also see no problem changing it to "was reported as the first member of a royal family..." – I just think there's something unkind to immediately jump on a RD to defame the subject. Kingsif (talk) 14:49, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

She is only not an infanta of Spain, on the other hand she is male-line descendant of the King Philip V of Spain, however Philip made his son (so Maria Teresa's ancestor) Duke of Parma but he was no longer an infante of Spain. But then Duke's descendants have been King of Etruria, is it not enough to be a princess with style royal highness? It's just wrong to mention her as Spanish princess on press. Tomás de H y B-P (talk) 09:34, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

She is the first royal to have died of COVID-19.

That's not a relevant category to mention. It would also mean there will be more. Putting it in the introduction is just ridiculous. --2001:16B8:316B:3E00:40EF:70B1:AACE:AFDD (talk) 04:21, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

cousinhood with Felipe VI

Marie-Therese de Bourbon actually is a 4th cousin, once removed, of the current King of Spain, Felipe VI. The nearest common ancestor is Francesco I de Bourbon, King of Sicily (d 1830). The lineage joining these two: MarieTherese - Xavier duke of Parma - Robert reigning duke of Parma - Louise de Bourbon - Caroline of Sicily - 1st marriage of king Francesco I his 2nd marriage - Ferdinand king of Sicily - Alphonse count of Caserta - Charles Tancred infante - Maria Mercedes de Bourbon et Orleans countess of Barcelona - king Juan Carlos I - king Felipe VI. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

As a side note, Marie-Therese here is not a direct descendant of the first carlist pretender, don Carlos. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Royal Highness and title of Princess

The predicate of Royal Highness is not spanish thing for her. Instead it comes from the decision of King Charles X of France and Navarre, and the protection the current French republic gives to such immaterial possessions. In mid-1820s, Charles ascended the throne as King and was deposed in 1830. The Napoleonic era just before, had made so many members of smaller dynasties around Europe as kings and their families as royal highnesses. so king Charles felt that members of the ancient and great, powerful House of France, in other words: the Bourbon, deserve better than earlier. Before revolution, only closest kin of the French king were royal highnesses. King charles granted the predicate Royal Highness to all legitimate male-line Bourbons, which meant that daughters and sons of remote cadet branches got it too. So, a legitimate Bourbon-Parma is a Royal Highness, on grounds of the grant from King Charles X. The republics in France stopped for a while all titles (however, did no longer resort to guillotining their bearers), but in the late 1800s, the Republic of France changed its course and gave legal protection to all titles the earlier French regimes had granted - reason for this is said to been that so many republic's leading politicians held personally some sort of noble titles, including the President of Republic who was Duke of Magenta. It is still part of the enforceable law in France. The crests of heraldry and the titles are protected as immaterial properties, like logoes and trademarks are (effectively, the same sections of French law codification). There exist today French persons whose passports are written to "Sa Altesse Royale --name...de..." and likes. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:51, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Marie-Therese has no need of a spanish title of Princess. Her title of Princess comes from the fact that her grandfather, Robert de Bourbon, was the reigning duke of the independent, sovereign duchy of Parma and Piacenza, in Northern Italy, up to the time of the Italian unification in 1860. She is regarded as princess of that little state and it is no problem with titles that the little state is no longer independent - all other European monarchical courts recognize their titles still. The king of Spain has no problem in accepting titles that come from, say, monarchy of Luxembourg or the deposed monarchy of Parma. 89.27.56.156 (talk) 15:59, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK nom

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 01:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma was nicknamed the Red Princess because of her socialist activism? Source: [4]
  • ALT1:... that Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma wrote a thesis on the ideology of Carlism in the 1970s, which she helped reform? Source: [5]; [6]

• Reviewed: All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Kalyani
• Comment: She was in RD for about half an hour at the weekend.

Created by Robertsky (talk) and Kingsif (talk). Nominated by Kingsif (talk) at 17:23, 31 March 2020 (UTC).

• Her "Red Princess" nickname needs to be directly cited to her socialist activism/views. Article is looking good, but DYK check is flagging that the article has appeared on ITN before. I've never heard of this issue before, but I'm guessing that since her name has been taking off RD this should be good to go? Let me know. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 20:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

• I've added a bit to connect the nickname and the socialism more clearly, thanks for the quick review! Kingsif (talk) 20:30, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

• Yep, the source reads that her "self-managing socialism" gave her that nickname. QPQ done too, so this should be a very quick good-to-go. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 23:31, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

• This is not appropriate for a DYK yet; there is still a controversy ever about whether the article title is even appropriate: See Talk:Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma and recent article history for contradictory page renamings. We shouldn't be putting "Did You Know" items up for people whose article names aren't even settled yet. --Closeapple (talk) 21:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Closeapple: There's no notice template for a discussion at the top of the article, so there wouldn't be any actual problems with posting this DYK at the moment. Start a formal talk page discussion if you want to hold out from this being promoted. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 23:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Nice4What: Which talk page, and what do we mean by "formal"? Is there a special talk page process needed for this? If so, where are the instructions for it? Wikipedia:Did you know seems pretty much unhelpful, and Wikipedia:Did you know/Approval is still not very clear; I can't find where one puts an objection. --Closeapple (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Closeapple: Read WP:RM#CM so that the page can be tagged for having a controversial title (I see you have a problem with the 'Princess' prefix). Let me know if you need any other help! Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 22:56, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

• Move discussion underway. Yoninah (talk) 01:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

• Move discussion closed with no consensus. robertsky (talk) 02:12, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

• The original review by Nice4What did not specifically mention many of the DYK criteria ("looking good" is not adequate), so it's important that this be done prior to restoring the approval tick. I see no mention of newness, length, neutrality of hook and article (especially important in a BLP), article sourcing, and close paraphrasing/copyvio/plagiarism check. Note that the ITN appearance in the Recent Deaths section does not count; if it had been a full blurb in the main section, that would have permanently disqualified the article from appearing at DYK, but RD appearances do not count, though DYKcheck will flag them based on the article talk-page template. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:04, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

• "Looks good" is a catch all. Appropriate sourcing, new enough, long enough... it meant it went through the DYK check. I went through the sourcing of the hook, and even discussed this above. This isn't my first DYK review, so it shouldn't be taken so critically... The article now passes. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 16:07, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

• Regrettably, as bare URLs are not adequate sourcing in DYK articles, and this one has two such references, approval is superseded for now. Nice4What, the point here is that all reviews should be specific in what criteria have been checked. As it says at WP:DYKN#How to review a nomination, Please begin with one of the 5 review symbols that appear at the top of the edit screen, and then indicate all aspects of the article that you have reviewed. New reviewer or someone who has done hundreds, it should be the same every time. Going forward, you now know that not only is completeness needed—this shouldn't have been accepted as a QPQ as it had been—but knowing what was checked makes the work of people who promote nominations that much easier when they doublecheck prior to promotion. Even now, you didn't mention checking for copyvio or neutrality. (I was aware you had checked for hook sourcing, and didn't mention it in my comment.) BlueMoonset (talk) 02:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

• Requesting second reviewer. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 02:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
• @BlueMoonset: To be fair to Nice4What, that bare url wasn't there when they first reviewed the article on 31 March. It was included on 4 April. I have sourced for a better reference anyway, given that the bare url goes to a blogspot domain. robertsky (talk) 05:09, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

• Looks like it passes all criteria. --evrik ^(talk) 18:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 3 April 2020

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: No consensus. (non-admin closure) Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 01:20, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

---

Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma → María Teresa de Borbón-Parma – (1) Direct violation of WP:TITLESINTITLES: We don't use "Princess" in page names even if a person is a princess. (2) It is disupted whether this person is even a princess, and the subject's page name is just as identifiable without it. (Suggested name has accents and "de" because it appears that her name is more common that way even in English; some sources use "y" and some use hyphen between the last names. There might be other suitable combinations as well, but in any case without "Princess".) The article was renamed to something similar on 2020-03-29 then renamed back. Closeapple (talk) 23:59, 3 April 2020 (UTC) —Relisted. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 02:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 18:54, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose It is not a violation of WP:Titles, and follows what has been done with every other princess of Bourbon-Parma in the modern era (not to mention the princes as well). It's also how the news has been referring to her, so one could argue WP:COMMONNAME. See Princess Marie-Françoise of Bourbon-Parma, Princess Margarita, Countess of Colorno, Princess Carolina, Marchioness of Sala, Princess Elisabeth, Duchess of Hohenberg for other Bourbon-Parma princesses. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 00:11, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose While I did move the page to a non-Princess title (not because I think she's not a princess, above it's well established that she had that title for at least one of various lines), due to other European royalty not having it in their article title, these other families are also often referred to by other names in e.g. the press - the British, Monegasque and Germans especially go by only their first names or a different title. The Parma royalty often have the title, so I'm fine with it having been moved back. As for the family name - it's spelled I believe the French way, per the rest of the family articles. Kingsif (talk) 01:37, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose Per under WP:COMMON. Ever since her death, English (the language, not nationality) news media has been reporting her as 'Princess Maria of Bourbon-Parma. I have tried searching for her without the title (even with the '-princess' keyword) in Google, but articles or pages without referring her as a Princess in any other languages (i.e. Prinzessin, la princesse, princesė, etc) is difficult to find. I am, however, open to additional findings to the contrary if it can be proved that she was referred to without her Princess title more than with the title in non-English based media prior to her death, as it seems that there are three notable points about her: her COVID-19 related death, her involvement in the Carlist movement, and her academic work, of which the two latter points should be more widely reported in Spanish media. robertsky (talk) 03:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

As a point here, the El País archive for her is under María Teresa de Borbón Parma, though not all of the articles use that specifically. Kingsif (talk) 04:42, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Went through the articles tagged in that archive. The article on her death didn't use her title. Two next latest articles, skipping the jewellery sales because she wasn't mentioned in the article at all, as referred her with her title. The rest of the earlier articles, likely printed being transferred to digital, are mostly short notices probably restricted by the amount of printing space dedicated to them. If this archive is an indication (tenuous extrapolation here though), she was referred to with her title by some of the Spanish media from at least 1997 onwards. robertsky (talk) 05:23, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support. We don't do this "wedding invitation" style for actual royals, so I think it's hard to justify in this case. "Honorifics and other titles such as "King", "Queen", "Blessed", "Mother", "Father", "Doctor", "Professor", etc. are not generally used to begin the titles of biographical articles," per WP:TITLESINTITLES. The Duchy of Parma was dissolved back in 1859. The ducal family of Parma isn't notable anyway. The subject's claim to fame is being the daughter of Don Javier, the Carlist pretender. Colin Gerhard (talk) 09:46, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• If the family isn't notable, then why do they have an article on Wikipedia? And what do you mean by "actual royals"? Are you referring to the likes of Princess Eugenie of York, Princess Angela of Liechtenstein, or Princess Stéphanie of Monaco? Because it would appear that we do use this style. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 14:08, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• Unlike "of York" or "of Liechtenstein," "de Bourbon-Parma" is a family name, not a substantive title. See this guideline. There is no place called "Bourbon-Parma" that you can be princess of. The current mixed royal/commoner style is the equivalent of "Prince Charles Windsor." She isn't a royal under Spanish law or under Italian law but only under Parma law, which has been defunct since 1859. Colin Gerhard (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• I see your point, although 'Liechtenstein' is a family name as well as a territory, (and York is used as a family name by Princess Beatrice in her American career) and Bourbon-Parma does come from the Duchy of Parma, which was ruled by the Bourbons. But, if we are going to move the article on the basis that Parma law is no longer valid, then why do we have articles like Caroline, Princess of Hanover; Gloria, Princess of Thurn and Taxis; and Princess Béatrice of Bourbon-Two Sicilies, who are all royals of defunct monarchies? To me, it seems to follow the standard already existing on Wikipedia to leave this article as Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 01:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• As a Parma royal, her style would be "Princess Marie-Thérèse," according to Almanach de Gotha, the authority on European titles. Here is her entry: 2. Pss. Marie-Thérèse Cécile Zita Charlotte, b at Paris 28 July 1933, GCCO (and Sen.), GCStL and Sen., Dr. rer. soc. [Las Norias, Claveles 43, Bloque 12-2B, ES-28220 Majadahonda, Madrid]. The "2" indicates that she is Don Javier's second child.
  As a nonroyal, she'd be Marie-Thérèse de Bourbon-Parma. Compare this to Marie Thérèse de Bourbon, who was a French princess of the blood. My point is that we don't use these flowery titles for subjects who actually are royals in the law. Colin Gerhard (talk) 10:36, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• Marie Thérèse de Bourbon was a consort (titlular Queen of Poland). The format of her name is typical for consorts, who are no longer living, that were princesses by birth. Look at say, Emma of Waldeck and Pyrmont or Mary of Teck. However, when they are a princess by birth and are not queens, the style is typically different (see Mary, Princess Royal and Countess of Harewood, Princess Marie Louise of Bourbon-Parma, Princess Alice of Battenberg, Princess Marie Bonaparte, Princess Cecilie of Greece and Denmark, or Princess Maria Luisa Carlota of Parma. There's no clear standard, but it is not inconceivable to keep the title in the name, particularly if that is how she is being referred to in the media. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 11:13, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• I have already linked to the standard as it is given in the guideline. The honorific should be dropped unless it is part of a substantive title. Colin Gerhard (talk) 12:22, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• Then why, pray tell, do we have articles like Princess Beatrice of York or Princess Michael of Kent? The only princess in the British royal family with a substantive title is Anne, Princess Royal. This is not a policy. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 12:39, 6 April 2020 (UTC) Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 12:37, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• Premature move! @M-Mustapha: You must revert back your controversial page move. This discussion is still ongoing and it appears most editors want to keep the title "Princess María Teresa of Bourbon-Parma". Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 15:58, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• I've moved the page to Princess María Teresa de Bourbon-Parma since I don't have pagemover powers. Nice4What (talk · contribs) – (Don't forget to share a Thanks ♥) 16:11, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support, per nom, and the truth is, I can't even differentiate these misleading honorifics!-Em-mustapha ^{User | talk} 16:18, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• @M-Mustapha: Moving the page without consensus is not the solution, move it back. As for "misleading" honorifics, how is "princess" misleading? -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 16:26, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

• Support per nom.--Ortizesp (talk) 04:01, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom. ~ HAL333 20:22, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per arguments of those who voted the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:301:4360:99D5:A7FC:AE81:1656 (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
• Support per nom. Also the laws of the former Duchy that would give her the title of Princess are irrelevant, as the Duchy went defunct almost 80y before her birth, and there is no support for the former claim by any other country (either would give relevance to the title) RScheiber (talk) 08:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:NCNT#Other royals (so clearly not a violation of naming conventions despite the claim) and WP:COMMONNAME. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

• The current title includes the subject's surname, violating point No. 4 of the guideline you cite. If we followed that guideline, the title would be something like "Marie-Thérèse (Parma)," which I think would be silly. Colin Gerhard (talk) 12:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose I agree with the above, and so the title must remain as it is. boldblazer (talk) 05:09, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.