This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Royalty. For more information, visit the project page.English RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject English RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject English RoyaltyEnglish royalty articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Wiltshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Wiltshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.WiltshireWikipedia:WikiProject WiltshireTemplate:WikiProject WiltshireWiltshire articles
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 11 January 2022 and 6 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hdgoble.
Latest comment: 1 year ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I've never seen the Seymour family being referred to as "Semel". I know spelling of names hasn't been standardized back then, but I find it odd that this variant (probably used only by one, non-native speaker in a private letter) warrants an "also known as" in the lede of the article (for comparison: not even the several, well documented variants of the Boleyn name merit a mention in the first sentence of Anne's article). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:AB88:2A0D:5B80:1461:586B:4328:951C (talk) 17:57, 2 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
Noticed this as well, especially since it was referred to prominently in the first sentence of the lead (but no where else in the article). It appears that only Imperial Abassador Eustace Chapuys referred to her as "Jane Semel" in his letters. Whether this was an his error, or an error of translation, it is still an error made only by a single person. I don't believe there is enough weight to merit the line "also referred to as" in the lead sentence. While this was simply was not her name, it leads to the widespread misunderstanding that it was was, as this page, especially the lead, is picked up by so many site mirrors, that don't go on to clarify the error and what lead to it. I've moved the mention of the errorneous name to the article body, after the first mention of Chapuys, where is coincidentally notes his making mention of her. - wolf18:02, 26 February 2022 (UTC)Reply
I agree that the article does not need to lead with "also known as Jane Semel" if it is very rarely or never used in the scholarship and was only used by a few people as a mistake or mistranslation. Does it need to be included in the article at all if it is used so rarely? CmisterHistorian (talk) 22:42, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 2 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
Queen Jane Seymore is mentioned in the book The Lady Elizabeth by Alison Weir
Queen Jane Seymore is mentioned in the book My Lady of Cleves by Margaret Campbell Barnes Diane harris71 (talk) 22:04, 22 October 2022 (UTC)Reply
She was born before English parishes were required (in 1538) to keep a record of baptisms. Before that date, it is more likely that no written record survives.Sbishop (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
I find it amazing that there is no complete record of where exactly she was born as well as specifically what year. The speculation makes the image of her all the more intriguing given that when she was married and when she passed, she could have been quite a few ages. Historianmummy (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
It's not uncommon - Anne Boleyn's year of birth is not known with any certainty. As to where, she was almost certainly born in the family home, like most children of the time; but no-one would have thought it worth recording the fact. Sbishop (talk) 21:41, 22 February 2023 (UTC)Reply
Latest comment: 12 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
The current article says 'According to Chapuys, she was of middling stature and very pale; he also said that she was not of much beauty, but Russell said she was "the fairest of all the King's wives".' Can Russell have meant by "fair" her pale coloring? It's a fair use of the word (pun intended; sorry)? I suggest this plausible reading because there may be no contradiction despite the "but". 18:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC) Zaslav (talk) 18:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)Reply