Talk:Marie Joséphine of Savoy

Latin enscription
The articles says her tomb is encribed with "Galliarum Regina". This literally means Queen of the Gauls, referring not to a plurality of Celtic people (Galli, -us, therfore Gallorum) but to a plurality of entitis called Gaul (Galliam -ae, therefore Galliarum).

I do not know whether this is a typo her or on the tomb or whether it refers to a plural term "Galliae" referring to France. Therefore, I have fact tagged it, given the literal translation and retained a reference to France.

Str1977 (smile back) 14:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Recognition of a Deposed Queen
Marie Josephine is appropriately styled as the Countess of Provence, but can we not also acknowledge her status as Queen of France, a role in which she served de jure from 16 June 1795 until her death? Maria Clementina Sobieska is another such example of this on the English Wikipedia. - Conservatrix (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is en encyclopedia. As a royalist, one may consider her to be a queen, because the royalist view is that the Republic was not legitimate and the monarchy still existed. That is, however, just that: a view. Wikipedia, or any correct Encyclopedia, must be neutral. To be neutral is to describe reality as it is, regardless of personal point of views.
 * In this case, France was a Republic from 1792, not matter what we may think of this. Because of that fact, Marie Joséphine was not a queen, and only consider a queen de jure by the royalists. Maria Clementina Sobieska was not a queen either, but just as Marie Joséphine, she was regarded to be a queen by royalist point of view, and therefore, this is also (or should be) mentioned in their articles.
 * Neutrality must not be compromised in Wikipedia, as that would destroy its credibility as a serious encyclopedia and deteriorate is value. The policy is called "Neutral Point of View" - or in short, "NPOV." I myself have in fact written the majority of this article over the years, but I respect the principle of neutrality regardless of my personal opinions and sympathies. And the neutrality of this matter was that she was not a queen because France was a republic. She was the legal queen in the eyes of the royalists, but in the eyes of the royalists, France was still legally a monarchy in 1795. This is obviously not a neutral fact, and to call her a queen, would be to take a stand in favor of monarchy, which is not proper for an encyclopedia, which should follow a policy of neutrality. To say that she was a queen in the eyes of the monarchists but not a queen in reality because France was a republic, however, is neutral and not to take a stand in favor of republicanism, simply because that was the reality. Wikipedia must, and I repeat must, be neutral in language, and can not present royalist point of view as facts, more than it can present any other point of view as facts.
 * I am sorry for writing so much, but I feel that you deserve a proper explanation, and as I have not the energy to participate in a lengthy discussion, it was simply the best to say it all at once, particularly as these kind of discussions can turn in to a heated debate and conflict from time to time, as this is the kind of things which people, I am sorry to say, often feel very strongly about. I a previous debate a couple of years ago, a royalist demanded that a person in a similar case be referred to as king, because the republic in question was not legal and to present royalist point of view should be regarded as proper fact: this is not neutral, this is to push a personal point of view on a neutral encyclopedia. This is just an example to stress the importance of the principle of neutrality, as I am sure that you understand this principle regardless of whether you consider the royalists point of view "the true reality" or not. I do not have the energy to participate in any further discussion, however, so I have just presented the Wikipedia policy as it is. Have a nice day!--Aciram (talk) 11:27, 1 May 2018 (UTC)