Talk:Henri, Count of Paris (1908–1999)

Opening heading
I think when it comes to categories his last name must be capitalised otherwise it doesn't list him under the 'D' it lists him under the 'd' list, which it ranks after the letter Z. Thus, in order for him to be recognised in alphabetical order, it must be 'D', not 'd'.

Greaser 05:16, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * If he's listed under either "D" or "d", he's listed wrong. "Henri d'Orléans" is alphabetized under "O". Seems like something which requires a technical solution. - Nunh-huh 07:10, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * In the interim until such a solution is met should efforts be made to compensate for the system's shortcoming? i.e. when it comes to how he is categorised putting his name as "Orléans, Henry, Comte de Paris" instead of "d'Orléans, Henry, Comte de Paris"? - Greaser 10:21, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)


 * Well, it's still quite wrong but it may be the best we can do! I'm a little surprised that a multi-lingual framework like Mediawiki has such rudimentary sorting, but it's probably not wise to wait until it's fixed.... - Nunh-huh 00:29, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)

He should be alphabetized at 'O'. Compare: you alphabetize Richelieu at R, not at d... "d'" or "de" just mean "of", before a land title of nobility. David.Monniaux 21:34, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup-tag
I added the cleanup-tag a while ago. I did it because I felt that the article need som structure, eg headers would be good. David Björklund 23:24, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I've cleaned up a bit and removed the tag. I didn't feel an article this short needs further subdivision. - Nunh-huh 01:21, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Political leftism?
The article on Legitimists says that he lost support among legitimists due to his "political leftism." If anyone knows anything more about that, it would be a valuable addition to the article. Kevin Nelson 08:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Chart
I think that this ancestry chart makes the triple descent more obvious:

- Nunh-huh 03:47, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I think you mean quadruple :-P Yes, it does, but the lengthiness of it strikes me as somewhat problematic. It would be nicer it the parent boxes could "nest" around each respective child because it's almost going off of the page for me and I have a relatively large resolution. Charles 04:49, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Something like this, then, but I have no idea how to do it in Wiki markup so it'll link anywhere.... - Nunh-huh 23:25, 11 May 2007 (UTC)


 * That's kind of what I mean, yes. I think that there should be a standard chart implemented to show ancestry anyway and something that is compact horizontally, like you posted, would be the best idea. Is there anywhere to post where people would know how to create such a thing? Charles 01:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Nunh-huh pointed me to this discussion and asked if I could make a compact version of the ahnentafel templates. Here's what I came up with:


 * Is it anything like what you needed? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 01:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that's a great improvement. And thanks for as well... - Nunh-huh 01:40, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's fantastic! :-) Charles 03:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Title
What was his courtesy title prior to his father's death? Did he have one, or was he just Prince Henri d'Orléans? john k (talk) 16:12, 15 August 2010 (UTC)


 * The New York Times article announcing the birth of his daughter, before he was the pretender, has him as Count of Paris so it was probably his title all along. Seven Letters 20:23, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Requested move: Henri d'Orleans, Count of Paris

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Page moved to Henri, Count of Paris. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:13, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Prince Henri, Count of Paris → Henri d'Orleans, Count of Paris – The proposed form of the name for this French pretender is from the obituary published by Sapa-AFP, France’s main news service. The AP's obituary, run in numerous newspapers, gives him as “Henri d’Orleans, the Count of Paris”. The obit in The Economist calls him “Henri d’Orleans". As far as “prince" goes, it does appear in the WP:RS in a minority of references. But as it was not a legally recognized title of nobility, it should be dropped off the same way we would “president”, “general”, “Dr.”, etc. The main problem with the current title is that he is given without a surname. This is royal style and certainly not majority usage in the RS. If you want to find more information about this person, you need to know his surname and look for him under “Henri d’Orleans" (although that will also give his son, the current pretender). Looking for “Prince Henri” or “Count of Paris” won’t turn up anything relevant. For example, French Wiki gives the subject as Henri d'Orléans (1908-1999). Kauffner (talk) 14:33, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose Wikipedia doesn't have to bend in favour of "legal" usage over extra-legal usage. The prince isn't even doing anything illegal by using his titles. It is not comparable to "president", etc, because these titles are the actual names these people use. We also have our own style guide for nobility and royalty. Seven Letters 14:44, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:NCNT point 4, do not use surnames. He is most probably known best by just Count of Paris 'd'Orleans' is not necessary. - dwc lr (talk) 19:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Compromise? Follow the example of his predecessor: Henry, Count of Chambord: Henry, Count of Paris Prince is not a substantive title here; we do not use it for members of the House of France who are uncontested royalty. The Regent Orleans is Philippe II, Duke of Orléans; his cousin the Dauphin is Louis, Grand Dauphin. D'Orleans is not strictly a surname; but it is not necessary; neither is prince. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 00:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't have a problem with this suggestion. In some instances I find Prince relevant such as with British royal dukes. In this case I see it as less relevant. - dwc lr (talk) 03:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * There are many more hits for "Henri" than for "Henry". Other than that, this proposal is fine. You see him called Prince Henri d'Orleans as well, but to put the two titles together creates an inappropriately flowery form. This was apparently the form was used on his wedding invitations, but not much otherwise. It's not even on the Orleanist website. Kauffner (talk) 10:18, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Support Henri, Count of Paris. Some time ago I saw a discussion or suggestion at NCNT that suggested removing the princely title from those who use a substantive title. I agreed with it and accordingly agree with this. Seven Letters 18:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I concur, per dwc lr (i.e. sometimes "Prince Firstname" should be used for exactly the same reason it is standard usage in the UK -- to distinguish royalty from nobility -- but in this case the comte de Paris title is historically well-established enough that the distinction is unnecessary) and per Kauffner (i.e. his name, like that of most post-19th century Euro-royalty, is usually left untranslated). FactStraight (talk) 02:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Support dropping the "Prince".... no comment on the rest. Rennell435 (talk) 18:06, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Support "Henri, Count of Paris". Seems like a good compromise to me. Jenks24 (talk) 06:43, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Henri d'Orléans, Count of Paris which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:15, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Inaccuracy in Hal Vaughan paragraph?
Hi there. I know generally the best thing for editors to do is to fix issues rather than just flagging/noting them and then moving along and leaving them for someone else to fix, but I'm very far from an expert on this area and don't have time in the foreseeable future to do all the research required to get myself up to speed. As such, I'm just going to point something out here, and hopefully someone else can resolve it, if it needs resolving.

In this article, it says "As historian Hal Vaughan notes in his book FDR's 12 Apostles (Guilford, CT.: Lyons Press, 2006), 224 & 296 n 489, in mid-November 1942, Henri d'Astier de la Vigerie, a Vichy intelligence official serving under Admiral Darlan (who had just signed an armistice with American and British forces that allowed Operation Torch, the Allied invasion of North Africa), attempted to promote a royalist coup, and had colleagues Abbe' Cordier and Master-Sergeant Sabatier (a French instructor at an OSS-SOE camp in Algiers) secretly bring Henri, Comte de Paris from Morocco to d'Astier's apartment in Algiers. Both Darlan and U.S. General Eisenhower nixed the idea, however."

I was trying to edit that just to make it more readable and understandable, rather than having a rather long and convoluted sentence, when I discovered there was a Wikipedia article for Henri d'Astier de la Vigerie. Based on what that article says, it seems that this paragraph is misrepresenting the story. There it says d'Artier was a member of the Resistance, and "d'Astier and the local Resistance infiltrated the Vichy infrastruction in North Africa" – so not really what's conveyed by just saying he was "a Vichy intelligence official". Furthermore, the article doesn't mention anything about d'Astier trying to promote a royalist coup and Darlan nixing this idea, which doesn't at all mean that that didn't happen, but it would seem to be a big omission, especially given that later d'Astier was involved in kidnapping/arresting Darlan.

But all I'm going on here is an apparent inconsistency between two Wikipedia articles, and this seems like it might be one of those cases where there's not so much an inaccuracy as a slightly misleading phrasing or an omission of important information. So that's hard to correct, especially for someone (like me) who lacks general knowledge on the surrounding events. So if some other editor who knows more about this stuff sees this, could you look into what actually happened in these events and edit this article, and maybe the d'Astier one too, so that the reality is more clearly and accurately reflected? Thanks. BreakfastJr (talk) 13:16, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Henri d’Orléans comte de Paris.jpg