Talk:Prince Miguel, Duke of Braganza

Miguel as Duke of Braganza?
Just to remember everyone one of the most relevant fact from the History of Portugal: the Portuguese Monarchic Constitution promulgated in 1838 and never revoked, in article 98 categorically states as follows: "The collateral line of the ex-infant Dom Miguel and all his descendants are perpetually excluded from the succession". Also Queen Maria II of Portugal and Portuguese Cortes declared King Miguel without his royal status and also declared him, and all of his descendants, forever ineligible to succeed to the Portuguese crown and forbade them, under death pennalty, to return to Portugal. This decision was supported by the Portuguese Republic. It's important everyone in Wikipedia remember this fact. 84.90.92.195 (talk) 18:22, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Miguel was never Duke of Braganza, but merely a claiment. GoodDay (talk) 01:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right, GoodDay. But there are here in Wikipedia several users promoting false information and impartial points of view in an attempt to legitimize Miguelist pretenders. They are just pretenders to the Portuguese extinct throne. Anjo-sozinho (talk) 22:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Infobox/Pretender
His real name was Miguel Januário de Bragança and he was just a pretender to the Portuguese extinct trone. When several users deleted the Infobox/Pretender they are showing to everyone how they promote here false information and an impartial point of viwe about this person and subject. Anjo-sozinho (talk) 22:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Consensus? False information don't have consensus. Miguel Januário de Bragança was just a pretender (King Manuel II of Portugal is alive at the time of Miguel's opportunistic claims!) Anjo-sozinho (talk) 15:33, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

POV + False royal titles + Pure vandalism
The user Gerard von Hebel and (now) also the user Cristiano Tomás replaced all the fantasy titles (are not even courtesy titles) to Miguelist pretenders as if they were rights to use true Portuguese titles of royalty or nobility (they forgot that Miguelist pretenders are foreign, born originally out of Portugal and therefore so without any dynastic rights); they eliminated all the Infobox/Pretenders in Miguelist pretenders articles (and placed that they are "reigning" members of "Portuguese" royalty in a Republic, OMG!); they reverted all information (mine and now even from other users) just to promote lies and in a brazenly non-neutral way... and they are trying to accuse me of false things. In fact, both of them had a long history of adding POV edits to articles on Portuguese Royalty (especially in Miguelist Line pretenders and against Maria Pia of Braganza's claims) for some years now. They still editing and reverting articles based on false and unreferenced information. The Miguelist family is just a set of pretenders to the Portuguese extinct throne. All information and titles cited as "factual" by Hebel and Cristiano (Princes of Portugal, Infantes, Dukes, etc.) are just titles of fantasy (not even courtesy titles in Portugal) and based on Miguelist advertising literature (we must remeber that Portugal is a Republic. Also the Portuguese Monarchic Constitution promulgated in 1838, in article 98, categorically states as follows: "The collateral line of the ex-infant Dom Miguel and all his descendants are perpetually excluded from the succession". Queen Maria II of Portugal and Portuguese Cortes declared King Miguel without his royal status and also declared him, and all of his descendants, forever ineligible to succeed to the Portuguese crown and forbade them, under death pennalty, to return to Portugal. This decision was supported by the Portuguese Republic). It's impossible accept information like this and refusing to name the other existent pretenders, as Maria Pia of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha Braganza and Duke of Loulé (for example). This users factual accuracy about this subject doesn't exist and he isn't neutral. That's the truth. They just want to cover up the real information about the History of Portugal. They intend to win the community by "fatigue" through they constant revertions on a matter which he is not understood. As the community can see in the article of the House of Braganza-Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (just Hebel made more that 8 rv's to my editions!), or in the article of the pretender Duarte Pio of Braganza, and many others, the user Gerard von Hebel still reverting factual and neutral information to disputed factual accuracy versions, and giving several titles of fantasy to the pretenders of Miguelist Line and also counting with the (now usual) Cristiano Tomás support in that attitude. They accused me just to continue to publish their loved false information about this subject. Hebel user deleted also information based on verifiable references... Since last day, Cristiano and I started a consensus trial, but now cleary we can see that Gerard von Hebel asked to change that attitude by both of them. They are (both) replacing again all the fantasy titles as if they were true titles of royalty; they are again eliminating all the Infobox/Pretenders in Miguelist pretender articles (and placed that they are members of royalty in a Republic!); they are again reverting all information (mine and now even from other users) just to promote lies and in a brazenly non-neutral way... and now they are trying to accuse me and block me. I ask urgently administration neutral help. We can not allow lies in Wikipedia. Anjo-sozinho (talk) 23:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

On-going dispute
To participate and view an ongoing dispute concerning various aspects of articles pertaining to the Miguelist dukes, Maria Pia of Braganza, and the Braganza-Coburg articles, and an ongoing dispute between editors User:Anjo-Sozinho, User:Hebel, and myself, see here. Thank you, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 23:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

"Michael II of Portugal" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Michael II of Portugal and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 22 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. DrKay (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2022 (UTC)

Article title
I don't believe anyone calls him "Miguel Januário, Duke of Braganza". If I'm wrong, please provide reliable sources. DrKay (talk) 20:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)