Talk:Filipa Moniz Perestrelo

Biography Stub‑class

	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 articles
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Felipa Perestrelo y Moniz

Davidcottamosborn: The lady's name was Filipa Moniz Perestrelo, which is the correct Portuguese it was not Felipa Perestrelo y Moniz which is a Spanishized version of her name.

Dougweller Questions on Edits

" 8 December 2010 Dougweller (talk | contribs) (3,670 bytes) (I wondered about this one, but I doubt that anyone who needs to write their own article at pt.wiki is a reliable source, WP:SPS) (undo)"
I am concerned that you keep removing information that I add as if I am inventing it. I don't understand the comment you made (pasted above) are you saying Manuel Abranches de Soveral, ( http://www.soveral.info/historia.htm ) one of Portugal's trusted genealogists and author of "Sangue Real" is not a reliable source? Or are you insinuating that I am not the reliable source? I apologize if the links do not work, I see no reason why that is happening because it links to Filipa Moniz in http://www.geneall.net/P/per_page.php?id=52937 the database of www.geneall.net is one of the worlds most important genealogy sites and very necessary to understand the relationships of the people we mention in this article. I don't see how else to get the information to wiki readers. If I add it, you go delete it as not a reliable source. If I add a reliable source such as Portuguese genealogists from the 17th century you remove it. If I add a link to a current website run by geneaologists, you say I should not link? How then do we add the necessary information to Filipa Moniz's page to show who she truly was in her lifetime? Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 05:52, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We have a noticeboard, WP:RSN, where you can raise such issues. You might be able to persuade people that Manuel Abranches de Soveral is a reliable source, it was the fact that no one else had written an article about him on the Portuguese Wikipedia and he had to do it himself that made me doubt him. The information on genealogy web sites is added by users. Have you read WP:RS? And adding your own book is a conflict of interest, see WP:COI, but I didn't remove it, did I? Dougweller (talk) 06:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Colon-el-Nuevo, you would do well to read WP:NOENG which says, in part, "English-language sources are preferred over non-English ones, unless no English sources of equal quality and relevance are available. When quoting a source in a different language, provide both the original-language text and an English translation in the text or a footnote." Also see WP:SPS which says we don't cite open wikis, as you did when you cited pt.wikipedia.org. It would be better to cite a published book that is not available online than to cite unreliable online sources.—Diiscool (talk) 14:57, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Diiscool, thank you for the lesson. It is difficult to find time to read all the wiki rules. I will try to be more resourceful with the sources.Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Colón. La Historia Nunca Contada as Reference

On page 144 of this book Mr. Rosa shows an image of a document from the Portuguese National Archives known as Torre do Tombo, or TT. The document is cited as "TT, Convento de Santos-o-Novo, Doc. 477. Convento de Santos[-o-Velho], 4-1-1475. Imagen cedida por AN/TT" in whihc is written:

"Muy honrada, religiosa, señora doña Beatriz de Menenses, comendadora de dicho monasterio y Graçia Estévez, Lianor Correa, Catarina Rodriguez, Susana Pereira, Catarina de Valadares, doña Lianor de Meneses, Filipa Moniz, Johana da Silva, Johana de Lordello, Beatriz de Goes y Catarina da Rosa todas dueñas de dicho monasterio estando en cabido..."

Very Honorable, religious, lady Dona Beatriz de Menenses, superior of the said monastery and Graçia Estévez, Lianor Correa, Catarina Rodriguez, Susana Pereira, Catarina de Valadares, doña Lianor de Meneses, Filipa Moniz, Johana da Silva, Johana de Lordello, Beatriz de Goes and Catarina da Rosa al of them donas (owners or invested) of the said monastery being in committee...
It constitutes reliable proof that Filipa Moniz was thus one of the residents of that Order of Santiago residence.Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 21:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:RSN#Is this book by an IT specialist a reliable source for a history article?. --Dougweller (talk) 21:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:PRIMARY "Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation." You can't cite the text in an image and make a claim of your own based on that image. You need to cite, specifically with page numbers and preferably with quotations, from a reliable secondary source. Also, if you are going to cite a book, please provide full author/editor, publisher name, year of publication, etc.—Diiscool (talk) 23:31, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

April 2011

Colón. La Historia Nunca Contada does not meet the requirements for a reliable source. It does not meet the parameters outlined at Wikipedia:Fringe_theories#Reliable_sources: "Reliable sources on Wikipedia include peer-reviewed journals; books published by university presses; university-level textbooks; magazines, journals, and books published by respected publishing houses; and mainstream newspapers." Furthermore, there is no consensus to allow it as a source in this article. I also feel that the editor Colon-el-Nuevo has a conflict of interest in this topic. —Diiscool (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You beat me to it. I agree with everything you've said. Dougweller (talk) 17:48, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I find it amazing that you can both use Rosa as a source for this article and then also describe him as an unreliable source. I bet if he had written another reassurance of the 500-year-old tale, as did Morison and Tavianni, he suddenly would be a very reliable source. Yet the article mentions several points proven for the first time in Rosa's 3 books:

Documental proof that "Filipa was a resident of the Monastery of All Saints in Lisbon of the Military Order of St. James" - presented for the first time in Rosa's book
"Filipa Moniz as one of the twelve comendadoras" and thus an elite member of this Portuguese Order of Santiago - presented for the first time in Rosa's book.
That Filipa was a part of the team that managed the Monastery of All Saints's properties. - presented for the first time in Rosa's book.
That Filipa's name no longer shows up in the All Saints archives after January 1479. - presented for the first time in Rosa's book.
That Filipa could not marry anyone without authorization from King John II of Portugal. - presented for the first time in Rosa's book.

It is highly interesting that the source for all these statements is seen as an unreliable source. Maybe you should just rewrite the article to say what Morison wrote:

"Filipa Moniz was a poor boarder of All Saints and her mother could no longer afford to pay the boarding. Therefore Isabel Moniz married her destitute daughter off to a wool-weaving peasant who had just arrived in Portugal from a shipwreck."Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 13:33, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, the article does not cite any "Rosa." What are you going on about? I find it amazing that you can not stop pushing your own POV on this article. —Diiscool (talk) 14:28, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right. All the "Rosa" info is in there. It is just not cited. That is what I was going on about. I completely deny it is a POV. It is a pointing to documentation. That is very different. I could have a Point of View that Columbus was a Martian based on no documentation at all. That would be a POV. What I have been insisting on has been in showing what the overlooked documentation points to. In Rosa's books it is very clear that the documentation in Portugal points to another story than the one we have been fed. True, the books are only in Portuguese and Spanish and not known worldwide. Because you are unable to read them, that does not make them unworthy or unreliable. Do you find Morison's description of Filipa's situation more reliable? Just saying.Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 16:42, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Rosa was the first historian to show what the meaning of the Portuguese "comendadora" was and the first to show that the "All Saints" Monastery was a commendary for the elite members of the Portuguese Military Order of Santiago. http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordem_de_santiago / this is not a meaningless fact as it pertains to the wife of the future discvoverer. You can verify these things for yourself. I do not see that it is a POV to let the facts speak for themselves. Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 16:50, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

How do they meet our criteria for reliability at WP:RS? I believe that what you mean by reliable is not what we mean by reliable. Dougweller (talk) 20:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I find it amazing that you can both use Rosa as a source for the information in this article and then also describe him as an unreliable source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.16.51.158 (talk) 15:08, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I find it amazing that you think you can continue to sockpuppet. Do you think using an IP address that traces to Duke University makes anyone think that you are not Rosa? Besides 152.16.51.158 (Duke University) and Colon-el-Nuevo, how many other accounts do you have, Mr. Rosa? —Diiscool (talk) 15:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This one: 71.111.202.252 (Durham, N.C.)? You have a serious conflict of interest with this subject. —Diiscool (talk) 22:00, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is no conflict of interest in pointing out stupidity. Morison INVENTED his story about Filipa Moniz. No matter how often I point this out, you refuse to modify the article. Filipa Moniz and her mother Isabel Moniz and her brother Bartolomeu Perestrelo were nobles in Portugal. Filipa Moniz was never destitute nor her family. Filipa was a comendadora in All Saints meaning she was an ELITE member of the Portuguese Knightly Order of Santiago. She lived in this place all expenses paid just like the other comendadoras lived including Ana de Mendonça, John II's Mistress. Morison invented his story and the documentation shows that. Morison is the unreliable source not only for Filipa but for the whole Columbus narrative.Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 05:03, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The COI is in adding material you've written. You can suggest it on talk pages but should not be adding text sourced to material written by you. Dougweller (talk) 08:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dougweller, I have for 7 years now tried to keep these pages related to Admiral Cristobal Colon from being filled with fantastic but useless "inventions" of previous historians but I understand that it will take time for the perceived "history" to change and be replaced by the actual history. It is not my fault that others do not wish to learn about the new information that has become available in the last 20 years and insist on telling old man tales from dead historians who had neither the know-how nor the ways to get at the info that we have available today. They are all like David41, stuck in the past with Morison's book, followed closely by Taviani, both of who completly invented the Portuguese life of a weaver Colombo and deny the real life of the noble Admiral Colon and his Portuguese family, his expert navigation, his schooling, his secret mission and his close ties to the court of Portugal and its nobles. Time will fix this, even if I am unable to do it here, I can maintain an eye out for complete lies and insist that they be fixed. For a long time people wrote that before Admiral Colon sailed west, the world was believed to be flat. This BS is finally out of the Cristobal Colon history, but much more BS will be cleaned up as COLON. La Historia Nunca Contada, makes it into other languages. It's a simple matter of time. The pages of Admiral Colon's in-laws being added will slowly shed light on just who the person who sailed the Ocean Blue in 1492 was. It is guilt by association. No peasant in 1479 could marry Filipa Moniz. It was as impossible for a peasant to marry a noble as it was for a freed negro to marry Robert E. Lee's sister. It just didn't happen, no matter how Disneyish Morison wants to make it and this is reason enough to say that Colon never was Colombo. You cannot have the daughter of a Captain and sister of a Captain whose other sister married another Captain Pedro Correia da Cunha - who was also a Royal Bodyguard - and who herself was living all-expenses paid in an elite monastery of an elite Military and Knightly Order, go off and marry a peasant nobody washed ashore naked, homeless, with no job, no money, no posts, no schooling and who had never stepped in a royal court before that day. The mistake that the Genoese falsifiers made was to not present us with a noble Colombo. Had they done so then we never would have been tipped off to the lie a Colombo being the same person as the secretive Colon.Colon-el-Nuevo (talk) 20:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You know what the funny thing, about the " Origin theories of Christopher Columbus" ?

Even though all the contemporary chronicles and the majority of modern and past historians state he was from Genoa, some non-historians (an information technology analyst [1], an engineer [2], an economist, a lawyer [3] [...]) have elaborated alternative hypotheses. They are the new voice of God. What are the historians ? Historians ? Old stuff. Today ? This is the generation of Manuel Rosa. --2.33.180.85 (talk) 09:18, 10 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Morison ? INVENTED ? INVENTED ? Morison. What ? The leading North American authority, Admiral Samuel Eliot Morison, the Harvard historian, was the most distinguished writer on Columbus (with Taviani), the author of a multi-volume biography, and was himself a sailor who retraced Columbus’s route across the Atlantic. In his popular book "Admiral of the ocean sea: a life of Christopher Columbus" written in 1942, he writes : The story starts in Genoa with Discoverer's parents.

The History to the Historians.

Manuel Rosa is the latest to join generations of Columbus' "birthers." A Portuguese computer analyst... His sources are unreliable. --2.33.180.74 (talk) 08:36, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]