Talk:Marie Anne Éléonore de Bourbon

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marie Anne Éléonore de Bourbon article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (`~~~~`). New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite, and welcoming to new users Assume good faith Do not attack other users For disputes, please see our guideline	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

There was very, very little need to move this page certainly to the present and incorrect title.

It clearly states on the page she signed with the names Marie Gabrielle Éléonore.
You can hardly argue with a signature written by the person being discussed, dead or not.
Every single other article regarding this lady (except the enwiki one which is misleading in itself) follows the Marie Gabrielle Éléonore pattern.
There was no need to move it in the first place. As noted all but one page stats the Marie Gabrielle Éléonore. I don't understand why people can't just leave things alone. Less is more.
Why is it now considered okay to present readers with blatantly wrong information?

Someone please. :/ 78.149.129.238 (talk) 20:49, 28 February 2017 (UTC)}}[reply]

Why, indeed? — Jeff G. ツ 21:06, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COMMONNAME. -DJSasso (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Moving (Again)

Ok, if someone intends on using the "common name" argument again, you may care to look at other Wikipedia projects that have artiocles regarding this lady, because all but two refer to her as Marie Gabrielle Éléonore (en and de do not.) so that surely eliminates that argument?

One can hardly disregard the signature written by her own hand, she is going to have known her own name.
Why complicate things? Wikipedia is supposed to be an Encyclopedia, so why would you willingly present the reader with information, that when scrutinised is totally wrong? Surely that is contradictory to the entire Raison d'Être of Wikipedia? 79.76.132.169 (talk) 18:53, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not done There was no consensus to support the proposed move. Operator873^talkconnect 17:10, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]