Talk:Isabel Moctezuma

Name is not "Tecuichpo"
She may have ended up being referred to as "Tecuichpo" in later history, but that is a mistaken reanalysis of her honorific "Tecuichpotzin" which was a reduction from Tecuichpoch+tzin because (iirc) Nahuatl doesn't allow the consonant cluster "chtz". Thus it is inaccurate to say, as the article just prior to my edit, that she was "born" with the name Tecuichpo. 209.159.229.139 (talk) 06:18, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Her half-sister
Sorry, my English is very poor. The article says that Isabel Moctezuma became one of the Mexican Indians granted an encomienda and that among the others were Leonor (or Mariana) Moctezuma. Well, Leonor Moctezuma was Isabel's daughter, so she could not be her sister.

Thanks--Ibon U. (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2013 (UTC)


 * There were several Aztec women named Leonor in 16th century Mexico. One was a half-sister of Isabel; another was Isabel's daughter.  I'll try to clear up the confusion by calling Isabel's sister Dona Marina which was her other name.  Smallchief (talk  23:25, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Mother?
Is it known who her mother was? Myke 17:30, 12 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Teotlalco. Brutannica 06:08, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Citation
Could people please sort out what here comes from what source? - Jmabel | Talk 00:12, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

Insertion of Controversial Material
User 71.6.112.194 has inserted the same material into the Isabel Moctezuma article twice. I reverted it once, with an explanation, but he or she inserted it again without explanation. The new material substantially changes the content of the article. For example, the new material states that Moctezuma was murdered by the Spanish. The fact is that we don't know what happened to Moctezuma. That uncertainty has to be reflected in the article -- and any statements on that subject should be supported by reliable references. The new material inserted has no references the text of the article now disagrees with the references cited.

I realize that 71.6.112.194 probably fells strongly, for whatever reason, that Moctezuma was murdered by the Spaniards -- and he may well be right, but nobody knows for sure. But stating that the Spaniards murdered Moctezuma is comparable to stating flatly that OJ Simpson murdered his wife without mentioning that he was declared "not guilty" by a jury. You may be certain and I may be certain that OJ was guilty, but, in an encyclopedia article, material has to be presented with a neutral point of view. My recommendation would be that the material added by 71.6.112.194 be reverted. An alternative would be to simply eliminate any mention of the cause of Moctezuma's death and other non-referenced and controversial material added by 71. But that would impoverish the article. Or the article be tagged for not being neutral, but that would seriously compromise its usefulness to the reading public. Thus, I would ask that the material added by 71 be eliminated, or that a competent editor re-do the material to make it neutral in tone.Smallchief (talk) 09:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC) ____.

the 'Cortés, an unwanted child, and two more marriages' needs revising
i don't like how the passage is written. the person who wrote it assumed that the she consented to have sex with cortez. More than likely, he probably raped her. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crossovershipper (talk • contribs) 06:32, 25 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Reverting your edit. You provide no references, and you are applying a specific biased viewpoint. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 08:30, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Correcting my mistake. You had _removed_ an unreferenced and biased statement, which was correct. My apologies. Tarl.Neustaedter (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)