This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can anyone do a better translation of the poem? The translation that's there doesn't really say the same thing -- the words were changed to get the rhyme in English. Thanks! -- Auntof6 ( talk) 22:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I have a source [1] which indicates that she was the mother of Gaston VII, Viscount of Béarn from a second marriage, presumably to Guillermo II de Montcada. However, both Gaston and Guillermo show that the Garsenda in question was the daughter of this woman by the only husband shown here. I don't see the sourcing for that data on those pages, but I'm reluctant to alter them based on a passing reference in a book that is not about her. 1bandsaw ( talk) 14:08, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
This was sourced, and from a feminist perspective, this was a "hidden matrilineal dynasty" of European royalty, which hitherto has been seen solely in a patriarchal way.
As far as the source goes, UsefulCharts in Youtube is a reliable source, but all of the entries for royal descendants can also be sourced through Wikipedia as well. Links to the articles for these individuals were provided. If you need another source, I can provide the link to WikiTree, which also has links to primary sources.
The mitochondrial DNA of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh which validated the mitochondrial DNA and identities of the bodies of Empress Alexandra of Russia and her children was a highly reported study in 2009, and is in fact also mentioned in Wikipedia.
The fact that the mitochondrial DNA is listed allows a different way of tracing the unknown history of women in Europe, and other lineages.
How many Wikipedia articles are there about incredibly obscure patrilineal "Houses" and dynasties? Not one for a a matrilineal dynasty?
Any other justification for removing this, aside from erasing women's history in Europe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeogenetics ( talk • contribs)
Look the amount of talk about the "House of Garsenda" shows it has gained some relevance and should be referenced here in some way. It is certainly of interest and the fact she has these descendants is not the issue of dispute. I'd suggest those who keep removing the mentions of this fact write up their own section on it they are happy with and just stop this back and forth. 104.244.208.228 ( talk) 15:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
The talk means that this information is relevant to people, there should be at least a section stating there is a claim. It has become part of her story now. Even if it is wrong it is a major claim made that deserves reference, many articles include reference to claims. I'd just include a section called something like "claimed descendents" mentioning that this has been claimed, the existence that the claim has been made and seen by large numbers of people is not up for debate. 104.244.208.36 ( talk) 16:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Can anyone do a better translation of the poem? The translation that's there doesn't really say the same thing -- the words were changed to get the rhyme in English. Thanks! -- Auntof6 ( talk) 22:08, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I have a source [1] which indicates that she was the mother of Gaston VII, Viscount of Béarn from a second marriage, presumably to Guillermo II de Montcada. However, both Gaston and Guillermo show that the Garsenda in question was the daughter of this woman by the only husband shown here. I don't see the sourcing for that data on those pages, but I'm reluctant to alter them based on a passing reference in a book that is not about her. 1bandsaw ( talk) 14:08, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
This was sourced, and from a feminist perspective, this was a "hidden matrilineal dynasty" of European royalty, which hitherto has been seen solely in a patriarchal way.
As far as the source goes, UsefulCharts in Youtube is a reliable source, but all of the entries for royal descendants can also be sourced through Wikipedia as well. Links to the articles for these individuals were provided. If you need another source, I can provide the link to WikiTree, which also has links to primary sources.
The mitochondrial DNA of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh which validated the mitochondrial DNA and identities of the bodies of Empress Alexandra of Russia and her children was a highly reported study in 2009, and is in fact also mentioned in Wikipedia.
The fact that the mitochondrial DNA is listed allows a different way of tracing the unknown history of women in Europe, and other lineages.
How many Wikipedia articles are there about incredibly obscure patrilineal "Houses" and dynasties? Not one for a a matrilineal dynasty?
Any other justification for removing this, aside from erasing women's history in Europe? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archaeogenetics ( talk • contribs)
Look the amount of talk about the "House of Garsenda" shows it has gained some relevance and should be referenced here in some way. It is certainly of interest and the fact she has these descendants is not the issue of dispute. I'd suggest those who keep removing the mentions of this fact write up their own section on it they are happy with and just stop this back and forth. 104.244.208.228 ( talk) 15:55, 2 October 2020 (UTC)
The talk means that this information is relevant to people, there should be at least a section stating there is a claim. It has become part of her story now. Even if it is wrong it is a major claim made that deserves reference, many articles include reference to claims. I'd just include a section called something like "claimed descendents" mentioning that this has been claimed, the existence that the claim has been made and seen by large numbers of people is not up for debate. 104.244.208.36 ( talk) 16:12, 4 October 2020 (UTC)