Talk:Heloise

Discussions up to now were outdated and have been archived. I have moved some material in this article to a new article, Letters of Abelard and Heloise. Thiagovscoelho (talk) 20:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

This seems to have been a misapplication by a single editor of WP:FRMOS. This was a medieval figure and there were no diacritics in her name to respect. There's no more connection to these dots and slashes than to Eloise or Elizabeth and less connection to them than to Heloisa, not that we should use that either. There's no actual reason not to apply the WP:COMMON WP:ENGLISH name to this major historical figure. That name is Heloise, just like we have "Roma" at Rome, "Adélaïde d'Aquitaine" at Adelaide of Aquitaine, and—most obviously and damningly—"Pierre Abélard" at Peter Abelard. The only things using this name accomplishes is forcing the vast majority of users to come via the redirect of the name they actually use and creating a mistaken sense of modernity and foreignness to the figure.

No, this isn't a close call. Heloise is vastly more common in standard and scholarly English. Yes, the previous move was a mistaken WP:LOCALCONSENSUS of one editor without discussion and based on misapplication of policy. Yes, the page should be moved to its overwhelmingly more common English form, just like Abelard. — LlywelynII 01:12, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Really? She says 'I'd prefer to be your mistress', and sure, 'I'd like to be your whore', but that really doesn't equal 'I'd like to be a prostitute', and I can't see any 'honesty about sex work [sic]'. I spy a rather right-on anachronism?Katiehawks (talk) 16:21, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Y I have adjusted the text to make it clearer that her hyperbole is comparing marriage conducted without love and gold-digging marriage rather than just all "marriage", which is ludicrous. Rick Jelliffe (talk) 07:30, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

I don't see that the letter appoints her any kind of prelate, and I cannot see any WP:RS on this. She certainly was granted incomes and administrative rights, and independence from any bishop who would try to interfere, but there is no mention of sacramental/clerical jurisdictions, oversight or abilities. I am dubious that the term was used: or perhaps the term was used in a different way to the modern way, as in the wiki entry on prelatus nullius?

But I think much better WP:RS needs be found (i.e. one from a previous century that would not itself be repeating the Wikipedia info) or the term should be moved or qualified.Rick Jelliffe (talk) 07:17, 2 March 2026 (UTC)