A fact from Teresa Gil de Vidaure appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 February 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
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
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain 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.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
The Spanish article said she was incorrupt and that her tomb still exist.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 02:56, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The Spanish article is, unfortunately, unsourced. Therese Martin says that the epitaph still exists, but not the tomb. My Castilian is a bit rusty, but doesn't the Spanish article say that the monastery was demolished and that Vidaure's bones were recollected and moved to the chapel of the newly built monastery? That would indicate that the original tomb is indeed gone. Surtsicna (talk) 12:31, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I guess meant her remains. The info is not necessarily made up and could have come from the Sepulcros de la Casa Real de Aragón listed in the bibliography. I can't understand Spanish either. Not direct at you but anyone who would like to add the information later; the Spanish articles on royal figures go into so much depth when it comes to burials, something barely mention in Englosh articles. We care so much about the whereabouts Egyptian burials but very little about the remains and burials of European royals. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 17:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I too have noticed that trend on es.wiki. However, I would like to maintain the quality of the article by inserting clearly only sourced information. I have tried to track the information about her remains, but could not find anything. It would be truly great if you could find it; few medieval European royals got unintentionally mummified. Surtsicna (talk) 17:59, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
