Talk:Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma

Untitled

This title [ETA Prince Xavier of Parma; I moved it already] is absurd. It should be either Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma or Xavier, Duke of Parma. I don't see any justification for the current title. john k (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't call it absurd, that's a little POV. It's not as common as their invented dynastic designation seems to be used more with the princely title but it is still correct. Seven Letters 19:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

It might be technically correct, but it is absolutely never used. Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma is preferable in every way to the alternative. john k (talk) 05:32, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Now that Carlos Hugo's been moved back to Carlos Hugo, Duke of Parma, should we move this on back to Xavier, Duke of Parma? Xavier has the additional issue that he was "Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma" for ages 0-85, and "Duke of Parma" only for ages 85-88, when he was basically retired and no longer politically active. john k (talk) 00:49, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

We use the highest titles for people that they had. The Dukes of Parma after Robert have been titled Duke of Parma... I don't think it matters if they were duke for 3 years or 30... Seven Letters 01:01, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I agree highest title should be used, in all the move discussions the consensus has been to use the ducal title. - dwc lr (talk) 01:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Obviously this is our general policy. I do think that we should consider making exceptions in extraordinary circumstances. It is not like Xavier is comparable to someone like Edward VIII. Edward VIII lived almost his entire life either before, or after, the brief period when he was "Edward VIII". But that brief period was also the most important period of his life, about which the most has been written. The same is true for the vast majority of monarchs who served only briefly. The only real exception that comes to mind is Frederick III, German Emperor, who was dying of throat cancer for the whole of his 90 day reign and basically incapable of ruling. But even Frederick was an actual reigning monarch. Xavier was quite clearly notable almost entirely for things he did before he briefly succeeded his nephew as titular duke of Parma - for his abortive peace-making efforts with his brother during World War I, and for his Carlist activities in the 30s and 40s. I think he is much more comparable to a peer than he is to a reigning monarch, and we do make such exceptions for peers. Our articles are not at Robert Stewart, 2nd Marquess of Londonderry or Frederick North, 2nd Earl of Guilford or Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton. Why is Xavier's case any different from Lord Stockton's? john k (talk) 01:59, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Because he's the head of a dynasty and accordingly was duke of Parma. Seven Letters 06:41, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't see how being head of an exiled dynasty claiming title to a long-defunct duchy is so different from being a British earl that it warrants such different treatment. Why is the fact that Macmillan was only Earl of Stockton for the last couple of years of his life, long after his retirement, relevant to how we title that article, but the fact that Xavier was only Duke of Parma for the last couple of years of his life, long after his retirement (I believe he'd already given up his Spanish claims to Carlos Hugo by 1974), is not relevant? It is exactly the same situation. The "highest title" rule is based on the (usually correct) premise that the person's greatest significance derives from that title, or came during the time they held that title. That is demonstrably untrue of Xavier, so he should be an exception, like British peers who acquire titles after retirement. At any rate, propose a move if you like. I will oppose. john k (talk) 14:16, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Requested move to Xavier, Duke of Parma

The following discussion is an archived 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move. Cúchullain ^t/c 14:57, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

---

---

Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma → Xavier, Duke of Parma – Reverting a move that was undiscussed. The title is his highest one and all titular Dukes of Parma are under the title Duke of Parma. Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 13:12, 30 August 2012 (UTC) --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 19:53, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Can you please explain what just happened? It appears that you moved this page from Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma to Xavier, Duke of Parma, and then moved it back to Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma. Are you now proposing that it be moved again to Xavier, Duke of Parma? Or do you believe it should stay where it is? I find your comments above difficult to understand, because you said you were "reverting a move that was undiscussed", but it's not clear which of these moves you are referring to. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 21:27, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

To clarify I meant reverting the move from July 2010‎. I was trying to move it from Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma to Prince Xavier of Parma then to Xavier, Duke of Parma, yesterday, but it wouldn't let me, then I place the db-move template on the redirect and that didn't work. So that is why I am proposing here, moving to Xavier, Duke of Parma.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. See my comments in the section above this one. He was only duke of Parma for the last few years of his life, during which time he did nothing of note, having resigned his Spanish claims to his son some time before. If Harold Macmillan isn't at Harold Macmillan, 1st Earl of Stockton, I don't see why Xavier should be at Xavier, Duke of Parma. Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma is how he was known for the vast majority of his life, and unlike with a reigning monarch, Xavier's time as head of his house was not really significant (and not really anything more than nominal). john k (talk) 14:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://geocities.com/montejurra1976/donjavier4marzo1977.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://geocities.com/montejurra1976/donamagdalena8marzo1977.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:36, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

the Parma succession

The succession box says that both pretenderships, of Spain (Carlist) and of Parma, are disputed between his two sons. From their respective articles, that seems to be true of Spain (the elder son was deemed ideologically impure by at least some Carlists), but I don't see any mention of a dispute over Parma. I think that entry should be split. —Tamfang (talk) 08:12, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Internment at Dachau

The article says that his number as a prisoner in Dachau concentration camp was 156270. It just so happens that I'm working on a project to analyze prisoner cards from Dachau and I came across his card — and its number is not 156270 but rather 101057, as you can see here: https://www.zooniverse.org/projects/cseidenstuecker/every-name-counts/talk/3232/1424141.

Any ideas how to solve this discrepancy? (He moved between different camps, maybe 156270 was his number at one of those other camps and that book's author — or Xavier himself — got confused?)

By the way, this image may be freely used on Wikipedia/Wikimedia, we just have to credit the Arolsen Archives. Gazilion (talk) 17:28, 21 May 2020 (UTC)