Talk:Pedro Gastão of Orléans-Braganza

Titles

Pedro Gastão was not, even for monarchists, Prince of Brazil neither Prince of Grão Pará, since his father renounced his Brazilian titles to marry Pedro's mother (Countess Elisabeth Dobrzensky). It applies to his brothers and children. --Tonyjeff 16:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

POV regarding dynasticity

I have tagged the article as POV because Pedro Gastão's line is being described as non-dynastic when he is indeed a rival pretender to the Brazilian throne, rendering the designation of non-dynastic questionable at least. It is best to avoid terms of "non-dynastic"/"dynastic" in the lead where it is obviously POV and is better to discuss the situation down in the article text. I_vonH, however, is insistent on pushing his/her POV on the matter. Charles 07:13, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Charles what are you doing, your actually concerned about presenting a npov in an article shame you can't bring yourself to do the same elsewhere. - dwc lr (talk) 16:45, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I ought to report you for incivility for that crass comment and I'll do it if you don't smarten up and and don't quit trying to engage me in spats. Charles 00:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

There are many things which could be reported as incivility, such as an editing summary "DWC, you are full of it". Noel S McFerran (talk) 02:57, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Noel, I am not surprised. Charles 04:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Death?

We must have a reliable source to verify he died, please add the source to the article. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added Guy Stair Sainty's notice from alt.talk.royalty (links, etc). I feel that Guy Stair Sainty is a reliable source with an impeccable reputation for fact checking and I imagine his announcement follows contact with the House of Orléans-Braganza. Charles 16:28, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

A newsgroup is not a reliable source and is not wanted by our readers either (all your ref did was launch outlook express). If we cant find a reliable source we just wait until one appears, try the Brazilian newspapers. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:30, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I found a ref in O Globo. Since Google has become language oriented one has to search using Google brazil to extract this info, Google.com is useless. Thanks, SqueakBox 16:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Title of pretence

I don't believe that the title Prince of Orléans-Braganza became a substantive title or a title of pretence in the same way that Grand Duchess of Russia is for Maria Vladimirovna (the Grand Duchess) or Prince of Prussia is for George Frederick (the Prince). Therefore there cannot be a "titular 3rd Prince of Orléans-Braganza", especially since this was never a substantive title during the monarchy. Charles 18:11, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. Prince was his title, Emperor was his title in pretence. --Counter-revolutionary (talk) 18:51, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I have replaced "was the titular 3rd Prince of Orléans-Braganza" with "was one of two claimants to the Brazilian throne as titular Emperor of Brazil". Charles 20:48, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

I concur that "Prince of Orléans-Braganza" is not a substantive title or a title of pretence (but I would also say the same thing for Grand Duchess of Russia in the case of Maria Vladimirovna). Noel S McFerran (talk) 21:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Did Pedro Gastão actually have another title which he claimed and used which could be mentioned in the article? Other than titular emperor, of course, which is already mentioned. Charles 21:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

According the pro Petrópolis article Imperial Family of Brazil by Astrid Bodstein in Royalty Digest Quarterly he had the title “Prince of Brazil” - dwc lr (talk) 01:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Was that titled used often or was it implied though his use of the Imperial and Royal style preceding his title? Charles 01:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I don’t think I’ve seen any news articles etc. refer to any of the Brazilian pretenders by the Prince of Brazil title even in the Imperial Family of Brazil article it refers to him as Prince Pedro Gastão of Orléans-Braganza although it styles him Imperial and Royal Highness which only three people are entitled to The Prince of Brazil one of them. We could mention the Prince of Brazil title in the article though as we have a reference from a published source. - dwc lr (talk) 02:18, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I am a well-known advocate of basing articles on published sources - but that doesn't mean that a mistaken reference in a single published article should be mentioned. Pedro Gastão never used the title "Prince of Brazil"; it is only the dynasts of the Vassouras branch who use this title. The reason is that the two branches have very different ways of advancing their claims. The adherents of Dom Luis are legitimists who on occasion refer to him as Emperor. The adherents of Dom Pedro Gastão believe(d) in a liberal monarchy so they make no claims to de jure titles; they merely use the style prince with the family name. Noel S McFerran (talk) 03:28, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough - dwc lr (talk) 12:53, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

The 4th reference

The 4th reference is not what it should be. And as I see, it has the name "Astrid" in it, and that removes all the possible confidence on it. This Astrid is known in the brazilian monarchist community as one of the biggest liers we have ever seen. She gets some speechs of important persons and modify them to make arguments on defending the non dinastic branch of the Orleans and Bragança family. Some times she even create them, as possibly she created this one. Dom Pedro de Alcântara, eldest son of Princess Isabel, resigned his rights to the throne in a letter and never reclaimed it. Who didn't agree with that was his son, Dom Pedro Gastão. And his "heir", Dom Pedro Carlos has no interest in claim the brazilian throne, as it was said in a spanish newspaper [1]. The Petropolis branch is Republican.

I would like to have someone of the wikipedia to read this, and I'm already expecting Astrid to act here with some of her socket puppets. Thanks for the attention. Spirictum (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I do agree in some part with Spirictum. I mean that so far Pedro Gastão´s son, Pedro Carlos hasn´t claimed any position as heir to his father or as the Head of Imperial House of Brazil. No speech, no message, no article in newspapers, nothing. What we do have for sure, is that AFTER his father´s death, he declared himself republican, just like his brothers. And for me, that´s quite enough to say that he abandoned his father´s claims. We should take out any reference of him as a pretender to the Headship of the Imperial House. In fact, I believe that neither him nor his son should have an article for themselves. At most, a small bio in the Petrópolis branch article.--Lecen (talk) 22:50, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

The Petropolis branch clearly has supporters. The link here has a pdf document of a supplement from a Brazilian newspaper and it has a whole page dedicated to Pedro Gastao's son and successor Pedro Carlos. - dwc lr (talk) 14:11, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Requested move 8 March 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 00:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

---

Prince Pedro Gastão of Orléans-Braganza → Pedro Gastão of Orléans-Braganza – Not a prince. See consensus at Talk:Bertrand_of_Orléans-Braganza#Requested_move_28_February_2022 Ixocactus (talk) 20:27, 8 March 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. NW1223 <Howl at me•My hunts> 16:06, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

• Support per wp:NCROY—blindlynx 22:03, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.