This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Consider the "Old Man of the Mountain" episode of Mike Tyson Mysteries-episode five of season two. Does Douglas in fact have a Jewish mother?
If it's mentioned that he's an atheist shouldn't also his deathbed conversion to Catholicism also be mentioned? JorgeK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.46.144 ( talk) 22:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
As per WP:REDFLAG, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence: In a surprising turn of events, for a man famed for his atheism and secularism, he apparently confessed his love for Christ and was received into the Catholic Church on his deathbed, at his own request. [1], however, is not extraordinary evidence, but a partisan source. -- Zz ( talk) 21:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: *Pearce, Joseph (2006).
Literary Converts: Spiritual Inspiration in an Age of Unbelief. Ignatius Press.
ISBN
978-1-58617-159-9. {{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
Hmmm... before you decide he's the ninth and not the eighth you should look into the discrepancies in Queensberry (not Queensbury) enumeration. (Specificallly , you are counting James Douglas, styled Earl of Drumlanrig as the third Marquess, but he, as an idiot, never assumed such titles.) Would seem to warrant at least a footnote. --- Someone else 10:27 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
You have the advantage on me there. But the current Marquess is listed as the 12th. Mintguy
You're right. I erred in not correcting the errors in Alfred Douglas. I am fatally flawed - nay, morally repugnant. -- Someone else 11:37 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Douglas' efforts to end their relationship
Is this accurate??? I think no but have no sufficient references to delete this sentence. Someone should try to ascertain it.
77.197.248.57 ( talk) 01:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
His second wife had their marriage annulled on the grounds of non-consummation of the marriage because of the malformation of his genitals. So were the childre by his first marriage really his? PatGallacher ( talk) 23:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
The biography - and this article - is incomplete. There is nothing on his bizarre marriages, his life after the Wilde case and his eventual death. I am not qualified to complete it myself nor have the resources to do so but if any Wiki historian is interested, they should be encouraged to do so in order to complete the biography of this most bizarre man. Hubertgrove ( talk) 04:34, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
The introductory line gives him a post-nominal GCVO (Knight Grand Cross Royal Victorian Order). There is no evidence from his contemporary reference books (Burke's, etc) he received any decorations or orders of knighthood. As the Royal Victorian Order, founded 1896, was in the personal gift of his lifelong sovereign, it is highly doubtful Queen Victoria would have found occasion to honour him. I am deleting these spurious initials. Cloptonson ( talk) 12:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I question the correctness in alleging Queensberry 'publicly called' Wilde a "posing somdomite"(sic), when the epiphet was communicated in the form of the calling card he left at Wilde's club with the writing on it. Were there witnesses to the act? Had he deliberately staged it with viewers to back him up? The writing is disputed for its unclarity, others rendering it "posing as somdomite". I am correcting the month to February, that being when the card was actually delivered. Cloptonson ( talk) 14:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Categorization#Subcategorization. "Apart from certain exceptions (i.e. non-diffusing subcategories, see below), an article should be categorised as low down in the category hierarchy as possible, without duplication in parent categories above it. In other words, a page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category (unless the child category is non-diffusing – see below – or eponymous). For example, the article "Paris" need only be placed in "Category:Cities in France", not in both "Category:Cities in France" and "Category:Populated places in France". Because the first category (cities) is in the second category (populated places), readers are already given the information that Paris is a populated place in France by it being a city in France." I therefore suggest that the article "John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry" need only be placed in "Category:Marquesses of Queensberry", not in both "Category:Marquesses of Queensberry" and "Category:Marquesses in the peerage of Scotland". Because the first category (Marquesses of Queensberry) is in the second category (Category:Marquesses in the peerage of Scotland), readers are already given the information that John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry was a marquess in the peerage of Scotland by him being a Marquess of Queensberry. Alekksandr ( talk) 12:26, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
The business card identifies John as the Marquis of Queensbury. How did he come to be known as a Marquess? - knoodelhed ( talk) 18:56, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Consider the "Old Man of the Mountain" episode of Mike Tyson Mysteries-episode five of season two. Does Douglas in fact have a Jewish mother?
If it's mentioned that he's an atheist shouldn't also his deathbed conversion to Catholicism also be mentioned? JorgeK — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.53.46.144 ( talk) 22:30, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
As per WP:REDFLAG, extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence: In a surprising turn of events, for a man famed for his atheism and secularism, he apparently confessed his love for Christ and was received into the Catholic Church on his deathbed, at his own request. [1], however, is not extraordinary evidence, but a partisan source. -- Zz ( talk) 21:47, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
P.S.: *Pearce, Joseph (2006).
Literary Converts: Spiritual Inspiration in an Age of Unbelief. Ignatius Press.
ISBN
978-1-58617-159-9. {{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help)
Hmmm... before you decide he's the ninth and not the eighth you should look into the discrepancies in Queensberry (not Queensbury) enumeration. (Specificallly , you are counting James Douglas, styled Earl of Drumlanrig as the third Marquess, but he, as an idiot, never assumed such titles.) Would seem to warrant at least a footnote. --- Someone else 10:27 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
You have the advantage on me there. But the current Marquess is listed as the 12th. Mintguy
You're right. I erred in not correcting the errors in Alfred Douglas. I am fatally flawed - nay, morally repugnant. -- Someone else 11:37 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
Douglas' efforts to end their relationship
Is this accurate??? I think no but have no sufficient references to delete this sentence. Someone should try to ascertain it.
77.197.248.57 ( talk) 01:35, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
His second wife had their marriage annulled on the grounds of non-consummation of the marriage because of the malformation of his genitals. So were the childre by his first marriage really his? PatGallacher ( talk) 23:01, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
The biography - and this article - is incomplete. There is nothing on his bizarre marriages, his life after the Wilde case and his eventual death. I am not qualified to complete it myself nor have the resources to do so but if any Wiki historian is interested, they should be encouraged to do so in order to complete the biography of this most bizarre man. Hubertgrove ( talk) 04:34, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
The introductory line gives him a post-nominal GCVO (Knight Grand Cross Royal Victorian Order). There is no evidence from his contemporary reference books (Burke's, etc) he received any decorations or orders of knighthood. As the Royal Victorian Order, founded 1896, was in the personal gift of his lifelong sovereign, it is highly doubtful Queen Victoria would have found occasion to honour him. I am deleting these spurious initials. Cloptonson ( talk) 12:25, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
I question the correctness in alleging Queensberry 'publicly called' Wilde a "posing somdomite"(sic), when the epiphet was communicated in the form of the calling card he left at Wilde's club with the writing on it. Were there witnesses to the act? Had he deliberately staged it with viewers to back him up? The writing is disputed for its unclarity, others rendering it "posing as somdomite". I am correcting the month to February, that being when the card was actually delivered. Cloptonson ( talk) 14:13, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:11, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Categorization#Subcategorization. "Apart from certain exceptions (i.e. non-diffusing subcategories, see below), an article should be categorised as low down in the category hierarchy as possible, without duplication in parent categories above it. In other words, a page or category should rarely be placed in both a category and a subcategory or parent category (supercategory) of that category (unless the child category is non-diffusing – see below – or eponymous). For example, the article "Paris" need only be placed in "Category:Cities in France", not in both "Category:Cities in France" and "Category:Populated places in France". Because the first category (cities) is in the second category (populated places), readers are already given the information that Paris is a populated place in France by it being a city in France." I therefore suggest that the article "John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry" need only be placed in "Category:Marquesses of Queensberry", not in both "Category:Marquesses of Queensberry" and "Category:Marquesses in the peerage of Scotland". Because the first category (Marquesses of Queensberry) is in the second category (Category:Marquesses in the peerage of Scotland), readers are already given the information that John Douglas, 9th Marquess of Queensberry was a marquess in the peerage of Scotland by him being a Marquess of Queensberry. Alekksandr ( talk) 12:26, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
The business card identifies John as the Marquis of Queensbury. How did he come to be known as a Marquess? - knoodelhed ( talk) 18:56, 1 December 2019 (UTC)