Talk:Princess Helena of the United Kingdom

Comments

I noticed on Amazon UK that there are newer editions of two of the books cited as sources on this article:

• Eilers, Marlene A., Queen Victoria's Descendents (Rosvall Royal Books, 1997, ISBN 9163059649) (Amazon UK)
• Packard, Jerrold M., Farewell in Splendour: The Passing of Queen Victoria and Her Age (Sutton Publishing, 2000, ISBN 0750925124) (Amazon UK) - 81.5.135.110 19:51, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Note also that the title of the 1996 (US) edition of the second book is spelt "Splendor", whereas the 2000 (UK) edition has "Splendour" - 81.5.135.110 19:56, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Note before the rewrite in 2008. This is no longer an issue. PeterSymonds | talk 13:52, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Mount Helena, BC/Canada

This mountain in British Columbia was named for the Princess. Others surrounding Princess Louisa Inlet were named for her immediate family. --KenWalker | Talk 05:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

UpDown User !

Leave me alone and never destroy my work again !!!

Why can't you accept that ?

I leave you alone too.  --AndreaMimi (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

This is not personal, and you should assume good faith. I frequently look on British royalty articles, and came across these edits that way. Date links are no longer used, see MOS:SYL, and are being removed across Wikipedia. I also suggest you read WP:OWN, as your comments above "never destroy my work" suggests you think you own this page or part of it - you don't.--UpDown (talk) 07:09, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

@UpDown

You are very rude !!! Please leave me alone !!! Never destroy my work again !!!!

And never delete my comments here !!!! 

You work as vandalism !!!! --AndreaMimi (talk) 12:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Neither of you are vandals. Edit-warring over this is silly. You should discuss whether or not dates should be linked on the talk-page. At present, dates in the article are not linked, as recommended by the Manual of Style. DrKiernan (talk) 12:25, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Discussion is not necessary. The MOS is quite clear, and these were removed by another editor. Please also not I stopped reverting - to avoid an edit war - and reported the user.--UpDown (talk) 12:33, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

@Dr.Kiernan

I'm  not a Vandal. I'm only link the dates like in other articles too. It's allowed. There are so many articles with linked dates. 

But UpDown destory my work, because he don't like me. And I don't like him. It's only personal. --AndreaMimi (talk) 12:27, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

You should only link dates when there is a good reason. For instance, if you are editing an article which mentions a revolutionary event in 1848, that would be a good reason to link that year because that was a year of revolutions that are mentioned on the year's page. Wikilinks always make a page a bit harder to read, and if there are a lot of linked dates, it can look very messy. The fact that many other articles don't follow guidelines is not a good reason for you to link dates. Doug Weller (talk) 13:40, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Date of Death

Her date of death is given as 9 June a couple of times, but then it says she "died aged 77 at Schomberg House on 19 June 1923" just before the contents. Which is correct? Anthrcer (click to talk to me) 18:02, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Christian's titles and tasks

In the article, it says "As well as that of Ranger of Windsor Park, Christian was given the honorary position of High Steward of Windsor, and was made a Royal Commissioner for the Great Exhibition of 1851." I am not familiar with his life, but was he really a Royal Commissioner in 1851, when he was only 20 years old, long before his marriage into the Royal family? Or could the year be wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.27.242.131 (talk) 15:52, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

The Royal Commission for the Exhibition of 1851 is a charity. It still exists and there are still Royal Commissioners today [1]. Christian was appointed to the Commission after 1851. DrKiernan (talk) 07:19, 23 August 2010 (UTC)