`  == Redundant & trivial content  again ==  Efforts to reduce inappropriate style and content in this article may require request for external intervention. To avoid this, please let's stop adding and re-inserting non-encyclopedic matter. This has been complained of for years (see the ``Redundant & trivial content`` section of this talk page), but the editor responsible (committing the same errors at numerous biographical articles on the Capetians and their spouses and in-laws, as well as the Lorraines, Savoys, Estes, Gonzagas, Habsburgs, Wittelsbachs and French ducal families) seldom engages in talk page or edit discussions, instead re-inserting deletions and moving the page while dismissing fact tags and edit summary objections. The problem persists in two forms: inappropriate style and inappropriate content. The content violates Wikipedia's exclusionary policy against genealogical minutiae and exposition of insignificant details. It consists of excess in: Speculation (assumptions about the ``feelings``, ``thoughts``, ``attractiveness`` or ``relationships`` of long-dead persons, presented as if factual or probable yet not cited from the person's diary, correspondence or quoted statements); Trivia (information unimportant to the historical significance of the topic); Redundancies (information that is repeated more than twice in the article or duplicates info that is/should be in a different article), Extranea (superfluous information, only tangentially related to the topic). These edits reduce the professionalism of Wikipedia because they: #Include unsourced (and often, unsource-able) assertions that may be inaccurate #Use an editorial voice more appropriate to narrative in a novel than to an objective encylopedia  #Divert the article's focus from facts which make the subject encyclopedically significant #Pad the article, making it harder to notice when sourced expansion is needed.   `