Talk:Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, Prince of Venice

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge from Princess Luisa of Savoy[edit]

Please merge relevant content, if any, from Princess Luisa of Savoy per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Luisa of Savoy. (If there is nothing to merge, just leave it as a redirect.) Thanks. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-02 08:10Z

I have just changed the first part of the article. It was not enough clear that the reason why everybody knows Emanuele is that he is the grandson of the last King of Italy, this infomation should be the first to be read by everyone.

I don't wanna cause an edit battle but the person who is keeping on changing this page is using wikipedia in a criminal way. Nobody can write Emanuel is titular prince of Venice and Piedmont if THE ITALIAN GOVERNAMENT DOESN'T RECOGNIZE IT. You can write he claims to be the prince.. or that he is known as the prince ... even if he is not. Yuo probably don't know because you're not even italian and you don't even speak the language, but he has just finished being on tv tonight and no one called him prince, just because you can't be a prince if that title is not recognized in the same country where you say you're the prince. Yet the father is not a pretender to the defunct throne of Italy, He and the son wrote to Ciampi in 2002 calling him President of Repubblic. Therefore he is not the son of the pretender... as you wrtoe, but the GRANDSON OF THE LAST KING OF ITALY. Is it clear?

write here why you wanna change the page instead keeping on doing it without leaving any comment, this is vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.190.49.9 (talk) 02:29, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't you understand a meaning of "titular"? --Motsu (talk) 03:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop editing. You don't understand technical terms clearly, "titular" "title" etc. --Motsu (talk) 03:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I know what titular means,and I really don't understand what you think is wrong in what I wrote.

"Titular Prince of Venice ~" means that title created by abolished monarch or pretender. His father is pretender and created him "Prince of Venice~", So he is "Titular Prince of Venice ~". Is this OK? --Motsu (talk) 03:57, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see, but I think it's a little bit complicated for all those who are not expert of these kind of things, that's why I beleive the current version is ok. I’m also trying to understand how to change the title in order to put Grandson of the last King of Italy” Anyway if you wanna precise he has been made prince by the father when the monarchy was already departed in Italy you can do it, but be sure it will be clear that the Italian State doesn’t recognize it. That’s why the title should be “Grandson of the last King of Italy” 

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.190.56.145 (talk) 04:10, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's not title. And the person having "Titular title" as a policy is to make entry. So, it was described with "Prince of Venice ~" there. I think, you should have only added "Grandson of the last King of Italy" to the appropriate position of the text. --Motsu (talk) 04:31, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
83.190.56.145, would you re-edit it if you understood my thought? You denied the sentence of other members from misunderstanding. In addition, you wrote different things in the place that should have written "Title". It's too bad, these are Vandalism. Therefore, other members should revert these edits (I do it if it isn't performed in the near future). I think that you should revert your edits, and should add "grandson ~" "government ~", having respected the editing of other people. And you should entrust the result to the judgment of other members. --Motsu (talk) 23:45, 27 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sanremo needs to be in the lead[edit]

An IP has removed from the lead, the Prince's participation at Sanremo as a contestant which needs to be there as the lead is an overview of major points in the article. I am not including this as a publicity piece, but as an event which is a notable fact about the Prince, ergo needs to be in the lead.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:19, 20 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

daughter with Kate Moss[edit]

Prince Emanuelle claimed he had an affair with Kate Moss at the time of her pregnancy resulting in her daughter Lila G Moss / Hack - also reputed to be daughter of magazine editor Jeff Hack... . [1] This 'princess of Italy' should be added to the personal section. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.56.245 (talk) 05:25, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Illegitimate children (i.e. children born out of wedlock) are not considered members of the royal dynasty. 161.24.19.112 (talk) 12:28, 30 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Emanuele Filiberto, Prince of Venice and Piedmont → Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia – I moved this page to what I believe to be the name by which he is principally known, was reverted by User:DWC LR, with the edit comment "undiscussed controversial movie". So let's discuss it. Does Wikipedia use honorific titles when those titles have no legal status? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:37, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose article is correctly named according to WP:NCNT. Removing titles from non reigning royals has been discussed and rejected many times. Looking at Google News I am struggling to find any English language source that uses plain "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia", the majority, if not all, appear to accord him the princely title. Maybe in Italy 'Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia' is common but not in English language sources which is what we have to go by. - dwc lr (talk) 22:51, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The New York Times calls the subject "Prince Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia." Sidney Morning Herald calls him just "Emanuele Filiberto". ANSA, Italy's top news agency, implies a full name of "Prince Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy". WP:NCROY says to call pretenders, "what independent secondary sources in English call them." Kauffner (talk) 08:18, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Did not mean to write oppose because not one of the sources you have mentioned calls him simply "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia", so clearly "independent secondary sources in English" do not call him this. The majority of English sources, like the NYT you mentioned, will give him a princely title because, being a prince and member of the Italian Royal Family is the only reason he is notable. - dwc lr (talk) 10:26, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The initial "prince" drops off like other non-noble titles such as "general", "Dr.", "Mr." etc. See WP:HONORIFIC. Otherwise, we'd have article titles like, "Apple CEO Steven Jobs." Kauffner (talk) 03:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:NCNT which WP:HONORIFIC refers editors to. Specifically WP:NCNT#Royals with a substantive title point 1. - dwc lr (talk) 12:24, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the guideline considered pretenders to be royals, there wouldn't be a separate paragraph about pretenders. I'm more of a WP:COMMONNAME and WP:BIO kind of guy myself. Kauffner (talk) 03:19, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The 'Pretender' guideline refers to the claimant to an abolished throne, the heads of the royal house, like EF's father, not every member of a former reigning house. You can prefer Commonname but then please show how the proposed name, "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia", is in anyway more common than the many, many other possibilities. - dwc lr (talk) 10:22, 14 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, in English he is predominantly accorded the prefix of prince, because that is mostly, though not exclusively, what he is notable for and because that remains, both in the general media and Wikipedia's guideline, the prevalent usage in English for members of deposed dynasties. Nor has Wikipedia ever named its bios according to the "legal status" of what a person is called (e.g. Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich). Nor is the Marquis de Lafayette called "Gilbert du Motier" because that was his legal name or because "honorifics drop off": it's appropriate, on second reference, to drop Prince Emanuele Filiberto's title where it would be appropriate to do so when referring to the Marquis de Lafayette, but that doesn't affect the article's name. FactStraight (talk) 08:49, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Can't follow your reasoning there, looks like you are arguing for prefixing his name with "Prince", which is not under discussion here. He is constantly referred to in English-language news media as Emanuele Filiberto, or Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia, or Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy. A very quick search finds these:
New York Times
Sunday Times
Times
Times
Guardian
Guardian
Independent (11 results, note " … "Prince" … ")
It is unlikely to be useful to try to count Google hits, for what little that exercise is anyway worth, because of the difficulty of excluding his notable ancestors and the various streets, piazze, battleships etc. named after them; Google book searches run into the same problem, I think. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:58, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The Independent has this quote: "I am convinced that [through the show] Italians will finally be able to understand who Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia really is." The argument that his supposed princely status is, "only reason he is notable," suggests a misconceived view of the purpose of an article title. A title tells the reader the common name of the subject. The reason the subject is notable goes in the opening sentence. Kauffner (talk) 10:39, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
With royalty the only "common name" that can be indentified is something like Emmanuele Filiberto or Emmanuel Philibert, or for the last German Emperor, William II, or Wilhelm II. WP:NCNT has its own guidelines for article titles for royals as they can be called many different things. Someone like Charles, Prince of Wales is often called "Prince Charles" or "the Prince of Wales". What is clear is that to English speakers is that Emmanuele Filiberto is commonly called prince, be that Prince of Savoy, Prince of Venice, or Prince of Venice and Piedmont. If I was not an editor of Wikipedia and I came to this article (assuming it has been moved) I would be under the impression that Wikipeida supports the claim of Prince Amedeo, Duke of Aosta (b. 1943) and his son Prince Aimone, Duke of Apulia and that Emmanuele Filiberto is non dynastic. So for editors not familiar with this topic there are repercussions that they should be aware of if they want to support this move request. - dwc lr (talk) 12:24, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. When she died, Diana was no longer legally a princess of the United Kingdom, but was generally styled as such. Her formal style was "Diana, Princess of Wales" but she was most commonly referred to in the media as "Princess Diana" which, nonetheless, is not the title of her Wikipedia article: But to the public who know of her, "Diana" and "Princess" are the naming elements by which they do so (even when varying locutions were sometimes used, such as "Diana Windsor, the former Princess of Wales..."). Ditto Emanuele Filiberto, whether the "prince" precedes, follows or is used in lieu of his Christian names (like Diana who was both a princess of the UK and the Princess of Wales, EF is a prince of Savoy and the Prince of Venice). As noted, the fact that "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia" is also specifically used politically by royalists loyal to the Aosta line to indicate that they regard his father's rival, Prince Aimone, as the more rightful claimant to the throne, just adds chaos to confusion -- easily avoided. FactStraight (talk) 22:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Peacock edits[edit]

Extensive Edits to this article initiated on 13 July 2012 have altered it drastically by imposing peacock hyperbole and autobiographical style. Although it appears to include validly updated info, the unsourced adjectives, interests and career moves unfortunately put it in violation of BLP. If not changed to a more neutral tone and properly sourced for accuracy, these edits may not stand. FactStraight (talk) 09:00, 17 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other Activities[edit]

The section Other Activities is in my opinion nothing but a PR puff section befitting a Reality TV personality not a biography of an Italian Royal. There is not one citation that I can see. Is something going to be done about it because frankly it should otherwise just be deleted in my opinion. Solidzz (talk) 21:34, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, Prince of Venice. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:03, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 3 February 2024[edit]

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: not moved. Consensus is that the current title is the COMMONNAME in English. (non-admin closure)  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 19:48, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, Prince of Venice → Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia (born 1972) – Or alternatively without the disambiguator. First off the proposed name (just "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia") is the WP:COMMONNAME [2][3]. Second, WP:ABOUTSELF applies as the subject uses the proposed name [4]. Third, I fear that using titles in pretense for this branch of the House of Savoy and using surname format for the other claimants to the headship of the house (Aimone di Savoia Aosta (born 1967)) could appear as favoring the claim of this branch (possibly a NPOV issue). estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. FOARP (talk) 14:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. Results for "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia" on Google are mostly Italian media and when searching for only English results, barely anything relevant comes up. English language news articles refer to him as "Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy" such as at [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. -- Cosmic6811 🍁 (T · C) 00:02, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and User:Cosmic6811's reasoning above. - Therealscorp1an (talk) 00:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. UmbrellaTheLeef (talk) 00:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - as an english language reader. This is English Wikipedia, not Italian Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 17:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - as per COMMONNNAME. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 22:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom, in line with WP:ABOUTSELF and a significant minority of reliable sources. If it turns out that the consensus is to keep "of Savoy", we should at least replace "Prince of Venice" by (born 1972) as proposed, in line with WP:NCROY guidelines for titles of pretence. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed. Prince of Venice is almost never used. estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If anything, the title of this page should be Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy, Duke of Savoy, Prince of Venice. Simply because his father, the Duke of Savoy, passed away. Ordernsport (talk) 09:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NPOV estar8806 (talk) ★ 18:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Wikipedia should not be espousing a minority viewpoint by using these defunct titles in the titles of articles. D1551D3N7 (talk) 13:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose and Move to Prince Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy per WP:COMMONNAME. As both Wikipedia:Article titles and Wikipedia:NCROY state, it is generally advisable to use the most common form of the name used in reliable sources in English. Also, google hits alone should not be used to determine the most common name used in RS and WP:ABOUTSELF is not a policy for determining article titles.
Tatler, The Telegraph, Vanity Fair, Marie Claire, Daily Mirror, Daily Record, Geo TV, NDTV, The Daily Beast, Business Insider, Fox News, and People Magazine use "Prince Emanuele Filiberto of Savoy".
The Guardian, CBS News, Elle, Deadline Hollywood, Daily Bruin, Social Life Magazine, and Cafe del Montenegro use "Prince Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia".
La Cucina Italiana uses "Prince Emanuele Filiberto di Savoy".
South China Morning Post and Robb Report use simply "Prince Emanuele Filiberto".
Only ABC News, Marca, Deadline Hollywood, Tatler, Social Life Magazine, and Hindustan Times refer to him as "Prince of Venice", which while significant is not the majority.
Only The New York Times and Politico refer to the article subject as "Emanuele Filiberto di Savoia" without any title.
--StellarHalo (talk) 11:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]


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.

His heir[edit]

Who is his heir is disputed. Not everyone who recognise HIM as king recognise his father's pragmatic sanction of 2019. It's not the same claim as the initial Aosta claim. But after his death many will recognise Aosta as new king. It's like the Russian one. Many of those who recognised Vladimir until his very death in 1992 did in no way recognise his daughter Maria. And this one is even more dubious, as there are no non-morganatic Russian agnates left, while the Aosta are certainly non-morganatic. --95.24.69.178 (talk) 12:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you posting about Emmanual's daughter? GoodDay (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: "while the Aosta are certainly non-morganatic." Are you sure? Aimone is the last Dynast of the Savoys if you want apply the viewpoint and law of "equal marriage" valid during the italian monarchy regarding dynastic marriages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.197.249.58 (talk) 23:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You mean the descent from Marina Karella? Well, maybe. But I was actually solely speaking about the person of Aimone, not his children. --95.24.65.57 (talk) 20:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Emanuele_Filiberto_of_Savoy,_Prince_of_Venice&oldid=1213566957"