Talk:Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich of Russia

Socialist-Revoutionary or terrorist
The use of the term terrorist in this article to describe the Socialist-Revolutionaries is POV and should be changed.  Sp in ni ng  Spark  16:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

The article does not describe the Socialist-Revolutionaries as terrorist group. On the other hand, Ivan Kalyayev, the grand duke's killer was a member of the Socialist-Revolutionary party’s Combat detachment. It was a political motivated terrorist act. There is no way around that fact--Miguelemejia (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

romantic and heroic?
Large portions of the article read as an admiration of a "romantic" and "heroic" figure. In my opinion, this is inappropriate and could serve nationalist and reactional thoughts in Russia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.178.214.28 (talk) 18:01, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Adding sexual orientation category to this biography may be a WP:CAT/R violation
WP:CAT/R For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate. For example, while some sources have claimed that William Shakespeare was gay or bisexual, there is not a sufficient consensus among scholars to support categorizing him as such. Similarly, a living person who is caught in a gay prostitution scandal, but continues to assert their heterosexuality, can not be categorized as gay. Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, it should be immediately depopulated and deleted. Note that as similar categories of this type have actually been attempted in the past, they may be speedily deleted (as a G4) and do not require another debate at Categories for discussion. User: Pgarret (talk) 01:44, 12 September 2012 (UTC).

We need reliable sources for category claims. It may well be that such sources are indeed available and you can list them in the article - but if not, then who is saying that these people fit the bill? Just deciding that you think they fit the description is Original Research - and that's not allowed here. I need to see a few reliable little blue number in each categorization that links to a reference document that can be examined to confirm Basic Academic Rigour.


 * Most people that are listed in the misleading LGBT categorization can also be connected with the following:
 * -Heteroflexibility -is a form of a sexual orientation or situational sexual behavior characterized by minimal homosexual activity despite a primarily heterosexual sexual :orientation that is considered to distinguish it from bisexuality.


 * -Pansexual- A person who is fluid in sexual orientation and/or gender or sex identity.


 * -Polyamory- is the practice of having multiple open, honest love relationships.


 * -Affectional orientation - To holders of this view, one's orientation is defined by whom one is predisposed to fall in love with, whether or not one desires that person sexually


 * -MSM- are male persons who engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex, regardless of how they identify themselves; many men choose not to (or cannot for other reasons) accept sexual identities of homosexual or bisexual.


 * -Situational sexual behaviour is sexual behavior of a kind that is different from that which the person normally exhibits, due to a social environment that in :some way permits, encourages, or compels those acts.


 * Many people change their sexual behavior depending on the situation or at different points in their life. For example, men and women in a university may engage in bisexual activities, but only in that environment. Experimentation of this sort is more common among adolescents (or just after), both male and female. Some colloquialisms for this trend include "heteroflexible", "BUG" (Bisexual Until Graduation), or "LUG" (Lesbian Until Graduation).


 * Sexual orientation
 * A report from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health states, "For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time". "There . . . [ was, as of 1995, ] essentially no research on the longitudinal stability of sexual orientation over the adult life span. . . . [ I ] t [ was ] . . . still an unanswered question whether . . . [ the ] measure [ of "the complex components of sexual orientation as differentiated from other aspects of sexual identity at one point in time" ] will predict future behavior or orientation. Certainly, it [ was ] . . . not a good predictor of past behavior and self-identity, given the developmental process common to most gay men and lesbians (i.e., denial of homosexual interests and heterosexual experimentation prior to the coming-out process)."


 * Kinsey scale
 * Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale, attempts to describe a person's sexual history or episodes of his or her sexual activity at a given time. Ituses a scale from 0, meaning exclusively heterosexual, to 6, meaning exclusively homosexual.


 * The Sources?


 * Warwick, Christopher, Ella: Princess, Saint and Martyr, Wiley, 2007


 * Christopher Warwick who is he? Some writer, journalist. Academic qualifications.....Professor and where? Noted academic work or research. Which University press publishes his noted and widely known works? Is he qualified because he has his own personal webpage or that he has some books for sale on Amazon? I don't who this Christopher Warwick is but he called himself biographer on his internet page.


 * Cowles, Virginia, The Romanovs, Harper & Row, 1971


 * We have now Ms. Cowles as the "famed source". An half unknown (not serious source material) historian Virginia Cowles. Who is she? It is not enough to be of some notability, have a degree in history and to have written a few biographical books. Should we now mark the Grand Duke  Sergei Alexandrovich in the category of sadists or maybe someone suffering from a Personality ::disorder (ex. Sadistic personality disorder).


 * What does the WP article say:
 * -Later writers have accused him of sadism.


 * -A great deal of controversy around Sergei Alexandrovich has centered on the nature of his personal life.


 * - Sergei's marriage is barely documented. His private papers, including his correspondence with his wife, have not survived, and the evidence that does exist in the Moscow State archives, the most important repository of Romanov papers, is open to interpretation. According to some contemporary reports, Sergei was homosexual. .Unusual for royal couples, they slept in the same bed for all of their married life.

Adding sexual orientation category without consensus of reliable published sources
The question of reliability, academic standard and consensus of reliable published sources has been addressed a month ago on this talk page. The published sources in this article doe not in any way fill any of the before mentioned requirements. No arguments supporting the credibility and scholarly consensus of the sources have appeared nor has additional supportive sources been provided.

If one disagrees and thinks sources have the required consensus of reliable published sources and the needed academic rigour, please raise those concerns on talk pages. Simply adding categories is not productive and may be speedily deleted.


 * OBLIGATORY WP REQUIREMENTS:
 * WP:CAT/R For a dead person, there must be a verified consensus of reliable published sources that the description is appropriate.
 * For example, while some sources have claimed that William Shakespeare was gay or bisexual, there is not a sufficient consensus among scholars to support categorizing him as such.
 * [Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is ::created, it should be immediately depopulated and deleted. Note that as similar categories of this type have actually been attempted in the past, they may be speedily deleted (as a G4) and do not require another debate at Categories for discussion.


 * User: Pgarret (talk) 02:05, 12 November 2012 (UTC).


 * They weren't addressed a month ago - you wanted to make a change a month ago and "explained" it here by posting a non-specific POV essay on sexuality, generally, with a note at the end with your contentions about this article. There's no way that could possibly have allowed for a "discussion" about your changes or the development of consensus for your change, given it didn't actually explain why you were trying to make them. Coming back a month later and interpreting the fact that no-one could understand your essay as evidence there was no objection to your change is just silly. Those two things are not the same.


 * The category in question does not make an "allegation" about sexuality at all so the last part of your note above is misplaced. The article says he was LGBT and the categories reflect that. Just like if the article said he was born in France and was thus categorised that way. I think you misunderstand the purpose of categorisation. If you disagree with the article, the sources or the prose, say so or boldly edit the article. If it is agreed the information should be removed from the article then should be absolutely no reason for the person to be categorised that way. But removing the category while leaving in the information that prompted categorisation in the first place is just a waste of your time. Someone else will simply re-categorise the person that way because that's what the article says. If you feel so strongly about it, address the information in the article itself, challenge the sources or the assumptions/assertions based on them. Then there will be no reason to categorise the subject that way at all. But a crusade to depopulate LGBT categories is a obvious waste of resources. Stalwart 111  23:44, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Categories that make allegations about sexuality – such as "closeted homosexuals" or "people suspected to be gay" – are not acceptable under any circumstances. If such a category is created, it should be immediately deleted.

We need reliable sources for category claims. It may well be that such sources are indeed available and you can list them in the article - but if not, then who is saying that these people fit the bill? Just deciding that you think they fit the description is Original Research - and that's not allowed here. I need to see a few reliable little blue number in each categorisation that links to a reference document that can be examined to confirm Basic Academic rigour


 * Most people that are listed in the misleading LGBT categorization can also be connected with the following:
 * -Heteroflexibility -is a form of a sexual orientation or situational sexual behavior characterized by minimal homosexual activity despite a primarily heterosexual sexual :orientation that is considered to distinguish it from bisexuality.


 * -Pansexual- A person who is fluid in sexual orientation and/or gender or sex identity.


 * -Polyamory- is the practice of having multiple open, honest love relationships.


 * -Affectional orientation - To holders of this view, one's orientation is defined by whom one is predisposed to fall in love with, whether or not one desires that person sexually


 * -MSM- are male persons who engage in sexual activity with members of the same sex, regardless of how they identify themselves; many men choose not to (or cannot for other reasons) accept sexual identities of homosexual or bisexual.


 * -Situational sexual behaviour is sexual behavior of a kind that is different from that which the person normally exhibits, due to a social environment that in :some way permits, encourages, or compels those acts.


 * Many people change their sexual behavior depending on the situation or at different points in their life. For example, men and women in a university may engage in bisexual activities, but only in that environment. Experimentation of this sort is more common among adolescents (or just after), both male and female. Some colloquialisms for this trend include "heteroflexible", "BUG" (Bisexual Until Graduation), or "LUG" (Lesbian Until Graduation).


 * Sexual orientation
 * A report from the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health states, "For some people, sexual orientation is continuous and fixed throughout their lives. For others, sexual orientation may be fluid and change over time". "There . . . [ was, as of 1995, ] essentially no research on the longitudinal stability of sexual orientation over the adult life span. . . . [ I ] t [ was ] . . . still an unanswered question whether . . . [ the ] measure [ of "the complex components of sexual orientation as differentiated from other aspects of sexual identity at one point in time" ] will predict future behavior or orientation. Certainly, it [ was ] . . . not a good predictor of past behavior and self-identity, given the developmental process common to most gay men and lesbians (i.e., denial of homosexual interests and heterosexual experimentation prior to the coming-out process)."


 * Kinsey scale
 * Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale, attempts to describe a person's sexual history or episodes of his or her sexual activity at a given time. Ituses a scale from 0, meaning exclusively heterosexual, to 6, meaning exclusively homosexual.

None sourced sources without references to any primary sources. Recycled gossip-claims. Where's the spine?

1. The Romanovs Hardcover by Virginia Cowles, a American society debutante made some fame as journalist for covering the Spanish Civil War. No The Romanovs is not an serious historical book and does not even give sources or references to a proper academic text used as source. There is no reliable researched substance for claim only popular historical tabloid writing. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/charlesmoore/8701504/Virginia-Cowles-The-American-who-saw-Britain-at-its-best.html

2. The Flight Of The Romanovs A Family Saga -this collective biography begins near the end of Alexander II's reign and uses a large lens rather than focusing more narrowly. There already are exhaustive studies or autobiographies of the Grand Duke Michael Alexandrovich and this is note the most noted or quoted one. The books writes the mischiefs of the Grand Dukes and goes through list of some divorcing some liking many women and somen wven liking all - many women and men. The book refers to homosexual debauchery and peddling between that and mentioning bisexuality. No classification of sexuality in its specificity is mentioned and or intended or even especially researched, sourced.

3. Romanov Autumn Charlotte Zeepvat. The Grand Duke may have had homosexual liaisons but getting hard facts is impossible. This book does the same as The Flight Of The Romanovs using gossip and uncorroborated claims which entertaining illustrative of acts and ideas that where approved of or not thus describing the sensibilities of the court, but refraining from providing stated facts.

None of the book provides any references, citations, sources and most important of all primary source proving something is more than a claim. Go back in history and labelling people as this and that in the manner discussed is totally unacceptable as it is dishonest and anachronistic in its very nature.


 * Please observe the following


 * WP:SCICON The statement that all or most scholars hold a certain view requires a reliable source. Without it, opinions should be identified as those of particular, named sources. Editors should avoid original research especially with regard to making blanket statements based on novel syntheses of disparate material.


 * WP:FRINGE -A theory that is not broadly supported by scholarship in its field must not be given undue weight in an article


 * WP:EXCEPTIONAL - Exceptional claims require exceptional sources


 * WP:CHERRY fact picking. Instead of finding a balanced set of information about the subject,  a coatrack goes out of its way to find facts that support a particular bias. An appropriate response to a coatrack article is to  be bold and trim off excessive biased content

Only a persuasive suspicion can be established concerning Grand Duke Sergei varying objects of eroticism. Sexual categorisation in lack of clear irrefutable evidence, confession is dishonest and from a historical point of view abhorrently misleading. Pgarret (talk) 13:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Grand Duke Sergei Alexandrovich of Russia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090603075359/http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=1027701, to http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=1027701,

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 09:47, 22 October 2017 (UTC)