Talk:Wedding of Prince Albert and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Article name

Latest comment: 13 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

It wouldn't be Wedding of Prince Albert, Duke of York, and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon just as Wedding of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Lady Diana Spencer? Jibco (talk) 17:43, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I have no objections. Greenshed (talk) 20:11, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Guests

Latest comment: 5 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please restore those who attended.217.92.235.144 (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

You can restore them if you have a reliable source. Otherwise it cannot be added back. Keivan.f^Talk 17:53, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

Latest comment: 5 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Wedding of Charles, Prince of Wales, and Lady Diana Spencer which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:02, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 13 July 2018

Latest comment: 5 years ago21 comments12 people in discussion

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: consensus to move the weddings of Charles, Prince of Wales to Wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer and Wedding of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles as proposed, and no consensus to move the other two articles at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 07:02, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

– Per WP:CONCISE the existing titles need to be shortened, and based on the outcome of these two discussions (1, 2) and per WP:CONSISTENCY, it's better to move these four pages to the suggested titles as well. Keivan.f^Talk 22:26, 13 July 2018 (UTC) --Relisting. bd2412 T 13:38, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

Support per CONCISE, MOS:HONORIFICS; this is rampant over-disambiguation (or classism, or something else weird). — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 09:16, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Support per WP:CONCISE and WP:NATURALNESS. Rreagan007 (talk) 17:22, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Oppose This RM was proposed on 3 July, less than two weeks ago, and there was no consensus to move. We can't keep reopening discussions because we don't agree with what was decided. jamacfarlane (talk) 23:39, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jamacfarlane: Actually, it seems you misread the move: the previous one suggested moving it from "Prince Andrew, Duke of York" to "the Duke of York", etc. This one (a possible move suggested by NUMEROUS people in the previous move as a better way to make the titles more WP:CONCISE) is suggesting moving it from "Prince Albert, Duke of York" to just "Prince Albert", etc. Paintspot Infez (talk) 02:16, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

I recognised that, although was perhaps a bit harsh dismissing this RM as technically it's a different proposal. However, I still oppose per WP:NCROY which states in article titles If an individual holds a princely substantive title, use "{first name}, {title}". Examples: Charles, Prince of Wales, Anne, Princess Royal, Leonor, Princess of Asturias. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:42, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:NCROY is for articles about people. These are articles about events. Opera hat (talk) 23:06, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Technically, yes, but I'd say it's WP:COMMONSENSE to apply to this event as you can't have a wedding without people. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Support per SIMPLE AND NATURAL. CookieMonster755 ✉ 03:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Oppose the first two on WP:RECOGNIZABILITY grounds. "Prince Albert" to most people means Queen Victoria's husband, and Edward VIII is far better known as the Duke of Windsor than as "Prince Edward". Opera hat (talk) 04:42, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
Oppose the first two per Opera hat. DrKay (talk) 07:07, 16 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Opera hat: & @DrKay: Based on what you said, it seems that neither of you opposes moving the other two. What Opera hat said about the first two sounds reasonable, but the rest of them can still be moved to a more concise title. Keivan.f^Talk 21:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

[shrug] I would have preferred moving the last two to "Wedding of the Prince of Wales and...", but that didn't fly. "...Prince Charles and..." is certainly more concise than the current title. Opera hat (talk) 23:03, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

The problem with saying "Wedding of the Prince of Wales and..." is you don't know which Prince of Wales. Yes, I know everyone knows it's Charles that married Diana, but this is an encylopaedia and we can't assume every reader knows that. jamacfarlane (talk) 15:42, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

I don't oppose moving Charles's weddings. DrKay (talk) 09:58, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Support renaming the articles on the weddings of Prince Charles, as these seem to be uncontroversial. I'm neutral on the first two titles. —capmo (talk) 01:34, 19 July 2018 (UTC)
Oppose - as we need to know which Prince Albert, Prince Edward, Prince Charles. GoodDay (talk) 10:54, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
- @GoodDay: No we don't, as there's only one Prince Charles who has married Lady Diana Spencer, and one Prince Edward who has married Wallis Simpson. Just like there is one Prince William who has married Catherine Middleton. By the way adding their royal titles doesn't necessarily make them more recognizable, and having such long titles is against WP:CONCISE. Keivan.f^Talk 18:16, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

And anyway, the only other Prince Charleses were Charles I and Charles II, both of whom were also Princes of Wales at some point. So adding "comma, Prince of Wales" to Prince Charles's wedding article has zero value for disambiguation. (The Duke of Albany/Coburg was known as "Prince Charles Edward", as was the Young Pretender.) Opera hat (talk) 21:42, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Support the Prince Charles ones. I'm unsure about the other two. As has been pointed out, Prince Albert and Prince Edward commonly refer to other people, but the specific people they're marrying disambiguate it. M.Clay1 (talk) 07:33, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.