![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article contains a translation of Eleonora Katarina av Pfalz from sv.wikipedia. |
The claim that she was given the title princess of Sweden when her brother became king, was added to this article without any sources at all. This is evident by looking at the edit history of the article. Because of this reason, it is the task of those who which to keep this information to provide sources, not the other way around.-- 85.226.41.245 ( talk) 21:30, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for providing a reference, i.e. "Ulf Sundberg in Kungliga släktband ISBN: 91-85057-48-7 p. 281" May I ask that you provide information on the publisher, and publishing date? That should end all the silliness here. Please do not personalize this matter. Smallbones ( talk) 14:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Done And point well taken re: personalizing. Thank you!
SergeWoodzing (
talk) 19:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Countess Palatine Eleonora Catherine of Zweibrücken and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here. |
Opinion: Let me begin by noting that the entry into this dispute of Diannaa and Smallbones has not addressed the dispute listed at the Third Opinion project, so it is still a dispute between two editors, SergeWoodzing and 85.226.47.210. That dispute has partially been addressed by SergeWoodzing providing a source for his entry. The issue then becomes the text removed by SW in
this edit. My opinion is that the deleted material is, indeed, unsourced and is subject to being removed, but the edit in question should have only been {{
fact}}-tagged, not removed from the article.
WP:BURDEN says: One thing, however, is clear: whether in or out, the impending edit war over this addition needs to stop now. |
What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.— TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 18:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC) |
Isn't the picture in this article depicting a man? Againme ( talk) 17:44, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is a different image of her: [1] Perhaps it could be added to commons and added to this article? -- Aciram ( talk) 21:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article contains a translation of Eleonora Katarina av Pfalz from sv.wikipedia. |
The claim that she was given the title princess of Sweden when her brother became king, was added to this article without any sources at all. This is evident by looking at the edit history of the article. Because of this reason, it is the task of those who which to keep this information to provide sources, not the other way around.-- 85.226.41.245 ( talk) 21:30, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for providing a reference, i.e. "Ulf Sundberg in Kungliga släktband ISBN: 91-85057-48-7 p. 281" May I ask that you provide information on the publisher, and publishing date? That should end all the silliness here. Please do not personalize this matter. Smallbones ( talk) 14:07, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
Done And point well taken re: personalizing. Thank you!
SergeWoodzing (
talk) 19:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on Countess Palatine Eleonora Catherine of Zweibrücken and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here. |
Opinion: Let me begin by noting that the entry into this dispute of Diannaa and Smallbones has not addressed the dispute listed at the Third Opinion project, so it is still a dispute between two editors, SergeWoodzing and 85.226.47.210. That dispute has partially been addressed by SergeWoodzing providing a source for his entry. The issue then becomes the text removed by SW in
this edit. My opinion is that the deleted material is, indeed, unsourced and is subject to being removed, but the edit in question should have only been {{
fact}}-tagged, not removed from the article.
WP:BURDEN says: One thing, however, is clear: whether in or out, the impending edit war over this addition needs to stop now. |
What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.— TRANSPORTERMAN ( TALK) 18:43, 10 May 2010 (UTC) |
Isn't the picture in this article depicting a man? Againme ( talk) 17:44, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
Here is a different image of her: [1] Perhaps it could be added to commons and added to this article? -- Aciram ( talk) 21:14, 12 June 2014 (UTC)