User talk:Aciram/Archives/2012/December

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Catherine Birgersdotter of Bjelbo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Coswig (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:15, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Aciram. You have new messages at Sphilbrick's talk page.
Message added SPhilbrick(Talk) 18:19, 25 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Mora witch trial

Hello Aciram,

If you are still interested in the area, could you drop by the entry for the Mora witch trial and take a look at my edits? I'm basing them off of Robbins's Encyclopedia of Witchcraft and Demonology (1959), which appears to be a scholarly work if a bit out-of-date.

Thanks!

Garamond Lethe(talk) 08:49, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

List of the first female holders of political offices in Asia

Hi! I was going to correct the spelling of Morrocco (should be Morocco) in the List of the first female holders of political offices in Asia page, and I noticed that there are several non-Asian countries in the list - Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, and probably Egypt. I can fix this later, but as you have been adding these I thought I'd check with you. - Ttwaring (talk) 16:38, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Ah, you are perfectly correct! Those countries may often be mentioned to belong to the "middle east" in a cultural sense, but not to Asia, so they should not be in that list. Please feel free to move them! Thank you for noticing this!--Aciram (talk) 17:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Illegitimate children

Hi Aciram, sorry, I didn't see your update to the Reference Desk question! Thanks for the further info. Although I am certainly not an expert on that period, I would say the law was not as "fluid" as it was in the Middle Ages (where I am more familiar with similar questions). In your example, in the 1730s the nobleman's children with his lawful wife would of course be legitimate and would be recognized as such and would inherit his property/titles etc. His children with his acknowledged mistress and from the unmarried noblewoman would simply be illegitimate bastards. He would be recognized as their father, at least (which wasn't true elsewhere, where the children would be considered to have no parents at all), and he could acknowledge them and give them an allowance. But that would not make them legitimate, not even the noble woman's daughter. The only regular process for legitimizing illegitimate children was if the man's wife died and he married one of his mistresses. I am wondering if all the children could be made legitimate by an act of the king (which would be more important than the church at this point, I think), but I don't know. If this marquess was important enough, I don't see why not, but it seems unlikely.

There must be Wikipedians better suited to answer this question than me. I know User:John Kenney works on modern Europe (but maybe a bit later than this), so I would suggest contacting him. If he can't help, maybe he would know someone who can. Adam Bishop (talk) 08:52, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answer on my question of Illegitimate children! I am sorry for my late reply. I thank you for your tip, and I will ask User:John Kenney if he/she would be willing to help. What I am specifically interested in is this: you say that it was possible for a father to acknowledge his illegitimate children, and that he would thereafter be recognized as their father - in they eyes of the law?

My question is, then, what did he actually do to "acknowledge" them? How did he go about in performing this acknowledgement juridically? Was this a legal act in some way, as he was afterwards recognized as their father? Was there paperwork of some sort?

Or was this acknowledgement simply a completely informal affair, with only social importance and no juridical acknowledgement or paperwork what so ever? My question whether the case of the daughter was different was caused by the fact that the law was after all different for nobles and no nobles, but perhaps she would not be considered to be noble.

There is one other matter, and perhaps the law was the same in this case no matter time period: A woman was during this period placed under the guardianship under the nearest male relative, was she not? Then who would be guardian of the daughter in this case? I suppose the father, because he acknowledged her, but afterwards? Would it be her (legitimate) half brother, because he was the eldest male relative after the death of their father?

I thought I should ask just in case you had more to add after this. Thank you very much!--Aciram (talk) 16:23, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for my own late reply! I think it would be informal, like he would support them financially, which would be enough to acknowledge them and have everyone else recognize them as his children, even if this would have no legal standing. Unfortunately I don't know enough to answer your further questions...I imagine a daughter with no legal father would simply have no guardian, and would have all sorts of legal problems because of it, like being unable to find a husband, or at least to provide a dowry. (But if her father acknowledged her and supported her, and was of sufficiently high standing himself, they could probably get around some of the problems.) Sorry, I'm really not sure, so I'm not much help... Adam Bishop (talk) 21:39, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi, Aciram, unfortunately I don't think I can add much to what Adam has already told you. 18th century French family law is not something I'm terribly familiar with. The wikipedia article on the Duc du Maine suggests that he was not merely acknowledged by Louis XIV, but legitimized by letters patent. A quick google search suggests that this edited volume would probably be useful to you - it has an article specifically about the legitimation of bastards, and another article about guardianship. You ought to be able to find it if you have access to a research library. john k (talk) 18:50, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

I once again can't be very helpful. When I said that 18th century French family law isn't what I tend to focus on, I probably should have said that family law, in general, is not something I'm all that familiar with - most of my knowledge is in political and diplomatic history. I'm sure there have been books written on all these subjects, though - some keyword searches and a trip to a good library are probably the best way to go here. john k (talk) 19:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

Monks and nuns

Hi Aciram, I mentioned about a month ago that I have a friend who works on illicit sexual relations between monks and nuns in the Middle Ages, which you were asking about on the Reference Desk. Well, he actually just defended his thesis, which you can now read online, here.

And if you don't want to read an entire thesis, he's also written a shorter article on the same subject, here. Hope this helps! Adam Bishop (talk) 08:19, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

I do remember, and I am delighted that you do as well! I would in fact be very interested to read it all. Thank you very much! --Aciram (talk) 15:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

1804 in Haiti

Hi. I got your message; see User talk:188.249.195.140 for my action in response to your message. We need to attempt to open communication (for example, by using templated warnings) before blocking a user, particularly in cases like this where it is possible that there was a good-faith reason for at least some of the user's actions (this isn't a simple case of vandalism). It remains to be seen whether the user will engage in discussion.

Thanks for the alert. Be careful not to get yourself into an edit-war situation! --Orlady (talk) 14:55, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Helena Ekblom for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Helena Ekblom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helena Ekblom until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Mor Sæther for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mor Sæther is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mor Sæther until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. ReformedArsenal (talk) 00:55, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Adelaide, Countess consort of Savoy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adelaide, Countess consort of Savoy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adelaide, Countess consort of Savoy until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.

Hatice Sultan articles

Would you mind adding something to disambiguate on top of the texts of every Hatice Sultan article, so people understand there are other Ottoman princesses with the same name... Thanks. --E4024 (talk) 21:54, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Adelaide-Blanche of Anjou

You recently added to her page "She was the regent of Provence during the minority of her stepson from 994 until 999". I know I've seen this somewhere before but was unable to either recall where I read it or find a new source. If you remember where you saw it I'd appreciate it. I'd like to add a source citation (or you can). Thanks. Bearpatch (talk) 18:23, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, when I added that I wrote in the edit history that the information was from the article of her stepson[[1]]. I have been told it is correct to do so. It should be in her article, after all, if it is indeed correct. --Aciram (talk) 19:28, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

That's a good lead, I'll follow-up and see what I can find. Thank you. Bearpatch (talk) 19:34, 22 December 2012 (UTC)