Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales

Pinned Thread: Consensus on usage of "Catherine" vs. "Kate", "Kate Middleton"

The following discussion 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.

---

The Wikipedia Community has reached a consensus on "Catherine" vs "Kate" in favor of Catherine. Please do not post threads on this subject without at least reading the following threads:

• Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales/Archive 9#The name 'Kate Middleton' in the first sentence.
• Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales/Archive 10#Missing information on "Kate" name

There are numerous additional threads on this subject in the archives as well. Safiel (talk)

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.

Simplicity and concision

Hey @MSincccc, I don't really understand your revert. I don't see why that much simplicity is needed, and this oversimplification makes it sound like the photograph was made after everyone knew she had cancer. Aaron Liu (talk) 13:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu Your edit made was actually unnecessary. It made the language overly complex, I had say. Anyways no bad feelings about it I hope. Looking forward to our future collaborations. Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:58, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu You start the sentence with "Around 10 March 2024,..." which is a vague beginning indeed and it also goes against WP:Proseline.

Furthermore, the phrase ", which she announced on the 22nd." is all the more not required here as the aim is to convey to the reader the fact that she had already started chemotherapy before the announcement. Your tone actually does not align well with Wikipedia though you are an experienced editor. Any other editor to this page would have done the same. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:01, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

No bad feelings indeed, but...

The opening is less vague than the current version in the article that just says March. What proseline actually cautions against is formulaic, repetitive prose that goes "On A, B. On B, C. On D...", not the beginning of paragraphs with dates as a whole. It even uses "By January 1990" as a positive example. (Also, although I agree with it, proseline is an essay, not a policy or guideline. Be careful when citing such.)

Your aim may have been only to convey the reason she may have altered the photographs, but I consider the information that the public did not know at the time important. Currently the article sounds like the media picked on a woman with cancer for no reason.

I'm also not sure what you mean by tonal issues. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:24, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Well @Aaron Liu your edit is unjustified. "Around 10 March" is a vague phrase as well as not accurate as it was "on 10 March". Also, the version you suggest makes the information overly complex. I would like to hear from others before your version is accepted because the present version was put in place by experienced editors. @DrKay:@Keivan.f:@DeCausa: @Celia Homeford:@Martinevans123: Regards MSincccc (talk) 19:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

You may want to look at the timeline again. It used to be "In March", and never was "on 10 March", which isn't factually correct anyways since different media outlets removed it on different days. Just adding a half sentence to a single-clause sentence does not make it complicated by much IMO.
(For the pinged: the edit in question is Special:Diff/1216858982. By the way, the bulk of that subsection was added by @Slamforeman.) Aaron Liu (talk) 21:50, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

@MSincccc Oh, and pinging only works if you add a signature in the same edit, i.e. editing your message to include pings won't work. There's documentation about this at Help:Fixing failed pings. @DrKay @Keivan.f @DeCausa @Celia Homeford @Martinevans123 Aaron Liu (talk) 22:06, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

@MSincccc Aaron Liu (talk) 01:26, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

I have no strong feelings about this but "Around 10 March 2024" is a vague phrase IMO. It could range from 8 March to 12 March. So instead of having something that is not precise, we can have "In March 2024" as we are sure that the incident (in this case the photo being taken down) definitely occurred in March. Conversely we could use "In early March 2024". The section covering the Mother's Day photo needs to be trimmed anyway. It's bloated and full of unnecessary details and info that is mentioned elsewhere in the article. It's full of fluff (like details about her daughter's sleeve in the photo :| ), just like the ridiculous Where is Kate? article. Keivan.f^Talk 06:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

No objections to "In early March 2024". Martinevans123 (talk) 11:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Me neither. Aaron Liu (talk) 11:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Keivan.f and @Martinevans123 Would either of you warrant the inclusion of the phrase-"which she announced on the 22nd" to the sentence in dispute here? Looking forward to knowing from the others. Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

That paragraph looks fine as it is, to me. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes it is fine now but what happens when you add the additional phrase "which she announced on the 22nd" at the end of the paragraph. What about that additional phrase at the end? Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:54, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu, @Keivan.fand @Martinevans123 The present version removes the phrase "which she announced on the 22nd," making the sentence more concise while still conveying the same information about Catherine's chemotherapy treatment for cancer. It's already been covered under "Health" section of "Personal Iife". Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:58, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion, readers of a specific, popular section should not be expected to have read a subsection 8 subsections prior. It does not complicate the sentence much and dispels a possible misreading that everyone knew that she was getting chemotherapy and bashed the photoshopping anyway. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:02, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

There's nothing more to be added to the "Privacy and media" section. The fact that the photograph was released after she had began chemotherapy is clarified here and those further interested in the health related details will go to the "Health" section. "On the 22nd" is not a preferable way to refer to dates in an article like this. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:17, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Not sure about that. The video, with the announcement, was aired on the key date in this whole sequence, when all the speculation was finally resolved. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:20, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

But there are other ways to include it here. Not to say "which she announced on the 22nd"- a phrase which is clearly not the best of the lot. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:23, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

You can suggest better phrases. And either way a bad but clear phrase is way better than none. Aaron Liu (talk) 14:42, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Well, I will once other users whose responses I am presently anticipating have put forth their views. I hope you will let the present version of the article stay intact before we come to a conclusion. Regards MSincccc (talk) 14:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Are the only reasons you oppose this change that you think it is bad phrasing (which I don't see) and it complicates the single-clause sentence by adding another clause? Aaron Liu (talk) 20:26, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

Since it's been 2 days, and consensus seems to be slightly in favor of the half-sentence, may I add it? Not sure why you seem to hate it that much. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

It's already been added[1]. DrKay (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

Oh, nice, it seems I've missed it because of the lack of credit. Is the omission of the comma a BrE thing? Aaron Liu (talk) 00:13, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes @Aaron Liu MSincccc (talk) 03:34, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

"Catherine, Princess of Wales cancer diagnosis" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Catherine, Princess of Wales cancer diagnosis has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 8 § Catherine, Princess of Wales cancer diagnosis until a consensus is reached. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:54, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Deletion very good

The following discussion 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.

---

Extended content
I am delighted that Where is Kate? has been deleted and merged into a small section here. Everyone who had a part in this considerable benefit to English Wikipedia and the project's reputation can hold their heads high. SergeWoodzing (talk) 18:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC) There wasn't enough content to support a full separate page. It was always silly. 71.7.195.204 (talk) 21:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)

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.

"Where is Kate?" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Where is Kate? has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 14 § Where is Kate? until a consensus is reached. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 21:59, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 April 2024

Change ‘committed suicide’ to ‘took her own life’ as per standard language for reporting on suicide which highlights that suicide is no longer considered a crime in the UK. 2A02:C7C:6B23:3000:98F:56FE:5579:3C9E (talk) 09:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

 Done Now changed to "died by suicide", which is consistent with the wording at the target article Suicide of Jacintha Saldanha. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Should we primarily refer to the Princess of Wales as "Kate" or "Catherine" in this article?

It's Catherine and has been discussed multiple times before.

I think we should call her the former (Kate) because WP:COMMONNAME Coddlebean (talk) 13:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC) Have you seen Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales/Archive 10#Missing information on "Kate" name and Talk:Catherine, Princess of Wales/Archive 9#The name 'Kate Middleton' in the first sentence.? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 13:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC) 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.