Talk:Maria II of Portugal

Brazil Mid‑importance

	Brazil portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brazil, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Brazil and related topics 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.BrazilWikipedia:WikiProject BrazilTemplate:WikiProject BrazilBrazil
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biography: Royalty and Nobility

	Biography portal 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
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Portugal Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Portugal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Portugal 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.PortugalWikipedia:WikiProject PortugalTemplate:WikiProject PortugalPortugal

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Portugal To-do:

Find correct name The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

Improve key articles to Good article

Improve

Review

Category:History of Portugal: lots to remove there
Template:Regions of Portugal: statistical (NUTS3) subregions and intercommunal entities are confused; they are not the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be listed explicitly and not assume they are only intermunicipal entities (which accessorily are not statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this box).

Requests

See Requested articles

Assess

Help assessing articles.

Need images

Translate from Portuguese Wikipedia

Wikify

Vote:

Watch this list — Edit this list

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal 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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 26 January 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Maria II. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Peer review

History of Portugal (1777-1834) is now being peer reviewed. Please, if you want, go there and state your opinion. Thank you. Gameiro 19:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The only monarch not to be born in Europe?

Please verify, i remember some Benelux monarch being born in an "exclave" in canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.101.29.216 (talk) 21:36, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're thinking of Princess Margriet of the Netherlands. DrKay (talk) 15:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

King Miguel?

Miguel should be deleted from this article's Infobox & Navbox. Portugal doesn't recognize him as King. GoodDay (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

29th or 30th

What was she, the 29th or 30th monarch of Portugal? It's very unencyclopedic to be so unprecise.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 16:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

She might have even been 31st monarch of Portugal. It is not very unencyclopedic to be so unprecise. In fact, it would be very unencyclopedic to be precise. Why? Because historians tend to disagree a lot. Was Beatrice a monarch? Was Anthony, Prior of Crato, a monarch? Was Maria II's uncle a monarch of Portugal? You'll find different opinions while reading different books. Anyway, I am not sure that we need that sentence at all. Surtsicna (talk) 18:21, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox titles

The titles Princess Royal of Portugal and Duchess of Braganza should not be in the infobox and there certainly shouldn't be so much information about it. Please compare the article (and, as of recently, articles about other Portuguese monarchs) with articles about British, French, Spanish, Swedish and other monarchs. Here are a few examples:

The infobox in the article about, say, George III of the United Kingdom does not mention the title Prince of Wales, which he held as heir apparent, or the title Duke of Edinburgh, which he inherited from his father.
The infobox in the article about Louis XV of France does not mention the title Duke of Anjou.
The infobox in the article about Isabella II of Spain does not mention the title Princess of Asturias.
The infobox in the article about Gustaf VI Adolf of Sweden does not mention the titles Crown Prince of Sweden or Duke of Skåne, much less who preceded or succeeded him as such, or how long he held those titles.

Titles that are not hereditary are not put under "succession" parameters at all. See the infoboxes at Anne, Princess Royal, Felipe, Prince of Asturias, Infanta Cristina, Duchess of Palma de Mallorca, Prince Carl Philip, Duke of Värmland, etc.

The reason for this is that infoboxes are meant to provide the reader only the basic information about the subject. Maria II is not notable for holding the title Princess Royal of Portugal or Duchess of Braganza. She is notable for being Queen of Portugal. The essential biographical information about the last queen regnant of Portugal are not the date when she gained the title of Duchess of Braganza nor are the names of people who held the title before and after her. Such information belong to succession boxes at the bottom of the article. Therefore, I propose moving such titles from the infobox to succession boxes in this articles, as well as in related articles. Surtsicna (talk) 11:16, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that seems sensible. DrKay (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. Surtsicna (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Imperial of Brazil

How was she Princess Imperial of Brazil from 1831 to 1835? She lost her right to the Brazilian throne after she became Queen of Portugal.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 19:29, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

She didn't. See her infobox in issue section of Pedro I of Brazil. --Lecen (talk) 19:37, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah nothing is explained about this in either her article or the Prince Imperial of Brazil and Princess Januária of Brazil articles.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 19:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Because I didn't work on those article nor do I plan to do it ever. I don't care about Portuguese history anymore. I'll leave the related articles to the "experts" around. There seems to be plenty of them, all relying on google hits (don't worry, this is not a criticism of you, but of others). --Lecen (talk) 19:43, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ducal Titles

Does anyone know if Auguste's ducal titles (either of Leuchtenberg or Santa Cruz) legally became Maria's after their marriage? I know she wouldnt have styled herself as duchess, having been a queen, but was she -legally- Duchess of Leuchtenberg or Santa Cruz. Does anyone know? Thank you, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 20:18, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Was there a law that extended a man's title to his wife or was that a matter of tradition/custom? I assume it was the latter. If so, the answer is obvious. Surtsicna (talk) 20:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dates of Marriages

The article has 1 January 1836 in "Reign" section, but 9 April 1836 in the "Marriages" table (matching that in the table at Ferdinand II of Portugal). Perhaps both are correct, but referring to different stages of the process, such as marriage contract or ceremony? Davidships (talk) 09:49, 25 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Under the heading "Reign", her first marriage took place on 26 January 1835, but under the heading "Marriages and Issue", the marriage took place on 01 December 1834, 8 weeks earlier. Which is correct?Esaons (talk) 15:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Portugal being under "Brazilian rule"

The statement "The European country had been under Brazilian rule when both were part of the United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves" is biased, false and very obviously agenda driven. Never was Portugal under Brazilian rule, the court fled to Brazil it being a Portuguese possession. The sentence needs to be re-written making sure to stick to the facts, while using a neutral non-partisan stance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nurselambda (talk • contribs) 22:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

The succession box is extremely confusing I don’t have the time or energy to fix that dumpster fire. But I’m just mentioning it so that someone else can fix it. Thanks. Orson12345 (talk) 01:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Maria I of Portugal which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 10:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Photograph over painting

I am planning to restore the older lead image of Maria II. The current image of her doesn't really look good, since it is an early photo of her, and it doesn't make her look appealing. It's Just like Napoleon III, were the higher-quality photos of him were taken when he was already old and sickley. G0dzillaboy02 (talk) 12:10, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The photograph is more apt; she was the first Portuguese monarch to be able to be photographed and it is the most accurate representation of her in the later half of her life. She was not "old" she was 34 when she died; she was obese for the last "third" of her life, but not "sickly" - she died of child birth not a lingering illness. She looks perfectly fine in the image and if anything, this is a similar situation to Queen Victoria - skinnier and highly idealized in her early life portraiture, but a bit plump and more normal looking in the photographs as she aged - there is nothing wrong with that. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 17:24, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A photograph could be more preferred if available, photos in that time were pretty rare. G0dzillaboy02 (talk) 09:29, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For example, Pedro II of Brazil's lead image is a photograph is because he was able to live long enough to see better photographs despite being the younger brother of Maria.