Talk:Prince George of Denmark

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Prince George of Denmark is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on May 20, 2013.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Peerage and Baronetage / Politics and Government (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage (marked as High-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the politics and government work group (marked as High-importance).
 
WikiProject Denmark (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject English Royalty (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject English Royalty. For more information, visit the project page.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject London (Rated FA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Move suggestions[edit]

I propose (unofficially for now) this artilce move to Prince George, Duke of Cumberland, or Prince George of Denmark // DBD 10:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

This should really be discussed before it is moved. The conventions are likely to be changed to mention male consorts somehow. Charles 16:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

He was never known as Duke of Cumberland. It should go back to Prince George of Denmark. john k 17:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

The conventions already cover male consorts. See item #10 in the naming conventions: "The same rule applies to male royal consorts." The article is correctly named. What he was "known as" doesn't matter. Additionally, putting "Prince" in the title reduces his rank to that of a junior royal, not a consort of a ruling one.Chidom talk  01:57, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Of course what he was "known as" matters. That is the basic wikipedia naming rule - to use the most common name. If a specific naming convention takes us away from that for no good reason, it should be trashed. As to that statement in the naming conventions, I have no idea how it got there, and the talk page clearly shows that there is absolutely no consensus for such a rule. john k 17:04, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Also, you are wrong. item #10 is for living consorts. We are dealing with a dead consort, and item #9 does not specifically say that it applies to males, because it was never intended to do so. john k 17:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Chidom, he was a junior royal. He held neither rank nor title as husband of the Queen of Great Britain. He was never a Prince of Great Britain, let alone Prince Consort. Princesses who marry Kings become Queens, which is why they are not referred to as "Princess [Name] of [Place]". Prince George did not gain a higher rank nor title at the moment of his wife's accession; he was Prince George of Denmark his whole life. Surtsicna (talk) 16:51, 17 September 2008 (UTC)
Or this can be interpreted this way: He is officially ("officially" by Wikipedia's Convention) "George of Denmark", just like "Mary of Guise" and "Catherine of Aragon". Adding the "Prince" there actually is to make a note that he doesn't even get called "King", as that would be automatically assumed if we did not, as in "Queen Mary" and "Queen Catherine".

P.S., if we are strict on naming people by what they are commonly known of, he was actually called "Prince George of Great Britain" more often -- meaning just "The Title-less Consort, called George, of Great Britain; how about we call him a Prince, so it doesn't look so bad for him" -- in the context of his wife, who would ever still remember he was a Danish prince? The "Prince" in the name merely came from the power of Britain, no more the power of Denmark. What now?

Number of pregnancies[edit]

Here there are eighteen pregnancies: Anne, Queen of Great Britain#Issue. Here there are seventeen pregnancies: Prince George of Denmark#Issue. What is correct? Calle Widmann (talk) 20:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Queen Anne wrote a letter to Christian V after Prince Georges death[edit]

Queen Anne wrote a letter to Christian V after Prince Georges death. However Christian V died in 1699. Somshe wrote a letter to a death person? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.157.214.9 (talk) 19:04, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Amended. DrKiernan (talk) 19:52, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
It says here that she "insisted on writing herself to the King of Denmark to tell him of his father's death". That clearly refers to Frederick IV. I've added his name. The article discusses George's relationship with Anne's family in detail, so it would be nice to show that she was not oblivious to the existence of his family. Surtsicna (talk) 10:48, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Danish Royalty[edit]

Was he heir presumptive to the Danish throne? His brother accended the throne in 1870 and his son future Frederick IV was born in 1871. Frederick III's second son was George as Denmark practised agnatic primogeniture up to mid 20th century, he would be heir to the Danish throne between 1870 and 1871. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamika1990 (talkcontribs) 10:06, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Order of the Elephant[edit]

Prince George was also a knight of the Order of the Elephant.[1] That should be mentioned under Honours. Surtsicna (talk) 11:21, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Added. DrKiernan (talk) 17:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Four new portraits[edit]

I added four portraits of George a few minutes ago. Perhaps some of them can be used in the article. Surtsicna (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to put more in because when I last nominated Queen Anne at FAC someone complained that there were too many images of her. Currently, we only have two images that are similar in style and content (the lead image and the one from 1687), but we can argue for their inclusion because they show him 20 years apart. DrKiernan (talk) 17:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
I understand your concern, but some could replace those already included. For example, the National Maritime Museum portrait, which depicts George as Lord High Admiral, wearing ducal robes and the collar of the Garter, could perhaps supplant the engraving. On the other hand, the Legacy section might benefit from the 19th century miniature bought by Victoria's husband Albert, since it is said that Victoria hoped that her own husband would never be as "subordinate" as the "very stupid and insignificant husband of Queen Anne". The one by John Riley must have been painted before 1691, which would make it suitable for the Marriage section, where there may be place for another image - though both portraits would then be by the same artist. It is up to you, of course. Surtsicna (talk) 18:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
The Godolphin House Riley is distorted, because it has been photographed at an angle, so I prefer not to include it here. All these images show him in the same martial pose, holding a commander's baton and/or wearing the garter (either as a sash or a collar). I prefer the images to show different aspects or provide information that is not shown elsewhere in the article. So, the pictures of him at a young age, on horseback, and with his wife are clearly different and therefore, I think, worthy of inclusion. I like the statue because it's the only one, and I like the Sheppard engraving because it shows an alternative coat of arms (and the style of printed works at the time). The Weigel engraving is in my view the weakest image; in fact, I kept it in for the words at the bottom and in the caption (because they show his titles) rather than drawing itself, which is only really notable because it is a Continental work rather than a British one (and so shows he was an international figure). That image is the worst likeness as well, presumably because it was not drawn from life, but that again tells us something about the way he was portrayed. I think for more images to go in the article, they ought to show something clearly new or be of better quality than the current ones. However, that could be argued in the case of switching the Weigel engraving for the Kneller NMM, particularly as it would be swapping a black-and-white image for a color one, which would also be something in its favor. DrKiernan (talk) 18:58, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
I agree; it makes no sense to add portraits which do not contribute much (if at all). Is the portrait kept at Frederiksborg Palace worth looking for? Surtsicna (talk) 19:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
This page is about Frederiksborg horse, but features two images of Prince George as a bachelor. Given that very little is written about his life prior to Anne (merely seven sentences), perhaps an image would be a helpful addition. Surtsicna (talk) 20:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
On second thought, they barely show his face, so I doubt they would be any improvement. Surtsicna (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Prins Jørgens Garde[edit]

Apparently, George is not entirely forgotten in Denmark either. Prins Jørgens Garde still exists. Their official website contains a brief biography. Does the Garde merit a mention? Surtsicna (talk) 20:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

In Denmark, his name is most commonly associated with two other connections: 1) "Prins Jørgens Gård is a square forming part of the Christiansborg complex. Prins Jørgens Gård is the postal address for the Prime Minister's office [Prins Jørgens Gård 11, 1218 Copenhagen K] and the Supreme Court [Prins Jørgens Gård 13, 1218 Copenhagen K]. The connotation is however not as strong as e.g. "No. 10 Downing Street". 2) The Prince of Denmark's March (Prins Jørgens March). During World War II, the BBC used it in several broadcasts to occupied Denmark, and he is remembered in the Danish title. 89.239.209.112 (talk) 21:38, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Lady Russell[edit]

She was born Lady Rachel Wriothesley because her father was an earl, she then became Lady Vaughan on her first marriage and then Lady Russell on her second. Her husband was attainted in 1683, so I would presume he lost his courtesy title and so at the time she wrote of George's grief she would be reverted to Lady Rachel Russell, her own title she had from birth with her married name. The attainder was reversed in 1688 or 1689, so she might have been Lady Russell again after that. DrKiernan (talk) 15:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Should counties named for him be listed?[edit]

Two counties in the United States are named for him, Prince George's County, Maryland, and Prince George County, Virginia. Should they be mentioned in this article? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:41, 21 May 2013 (UTC)