:::::::I think it's already been pointed out to you the problem with the certificates as a primary source. There seems no point in repeating again. i suggest you re-read. As far as Lacey is concerned, yes that is it problem. There are far better sources than Lacey who is a coffee table author. I've tried to use his book ''Kingdom'' on another article and given up because of some pretty bad errors and over-simplifictions. I have a copy of Pimlott (which is far more reliable) but couldn't find anything about attributing a surname to the monarch - which is not to say it isn't in there. I just couldn't find it. You referred to numerous "academic publications" stating her surname is Windsor. Leaving aside your ''faux pas'' about Lacey, it would be more helopful to say what these are than continue bombast and bluster. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
:::::::I think it's already been pointed out to you the problem with the certificates as a primary source. There seems no point in repeating again. i suggest you re-read. As far as Lacey is concerned, yes that is it problem. There are far better sources than Lacey who is a coffee table author. I've tried to use his book ''Kingdom'' on another article and given up because of some pretty bad errors and over-simplifictions. I have a copy of Pimlott (which is far more reliable) but couldn't find anything about attributing a surname to the monarch - which is not to say it isn't in there. I just couldn't find it. You referred to numerous "academic publications" stating her surname is Windsor. Leaving aside your ''faux pas'' about Lacey, it would be more helopful to say what these are than continue bombast and bluster. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
:We already had an RFC on the matter & the result was "NO", to using Windsor as a nickname. Now please [[WP:STICK|drop the stick]] & move on. [[User:GoodDay|GoodDay]] ([[User talk:GoodDay|talk]]) 06:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2022 ==
== Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2022 ==
Revision as of 06:22, 18 December 2022
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Elizabeth II article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is undergoing a featured article review. A featured article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work, and is therefore expected to meet the criteria.
If the article has been moved from its initial review period to the Featured Article Removal Candidate (FARC) section, you may support or contest its removal.
While the biographies of living persons policy does not apply directly to the subject of this article, it may contain material that relates to living persons, such as friends and family of persons no longer living, or living persons involved in the subject matter. Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material about living persons must be removed immediately. If such material is re-inserted repeatedly, or if there are other concerns related to this policy, please see this noticeboard.
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.
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.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject British Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to British Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.British RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject British RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject British RoyaltyBritish royalty articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Commonwealth, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Commonwealth of Nations 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.CommonwealthWikipedia:WikiProject CommonwealthTemplate:WikiProject CommonwealthCommonwealth articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Caribbean, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to the countries of the Caribbean on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.CaribbeanWikipedia:WikiProject CaribbeanTemplate:WikiProject CaribbeanCaribbean articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Melanesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Melanesia 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.MelanesiaWikipedia:WikiProject MelanesiaTemplate:WikiProject MelanesiaMelanesia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia 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.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belize, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belize 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.BelizeWikipedia:WikiProject BelizeTemplate:WikiProject BelizeBelize articles
Elizabeth II is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Canada 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.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics 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.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Grenada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Grenada 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.GrenadaWikipedia:WikiProject GrenadaTemplate:WikiProject GrenadaGrenada articles
Elizabeth II is within the scope of WikiProject Zimbabwe, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Zimbabwe and Zimbabwe-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.ZimbabweWikipedia:WikiProject ZimbabweTemplate:WikiProject ZimbabweZimbabwe articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malta, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malta 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.MaltaWikipedia:WikiProject MaltaTemplate:WikiProject MaltaMalta articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa 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.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Elizabeth II is part of the Scouting WikiProject, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scouting and Guiding on the Wikipedia. This includes but is not limited to boy and girl organizations, WAGGGS and WOSM organizations as well as those not so affiliated, country and region-specific topics, and anything else related to Scouting. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ScoutingWikipedia:WikiProject ScoutingTemplate:WikiProject ScoutingScouting articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom 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.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles 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.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is written in British English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, defence, artefact, analyse) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.
This article has previously been nominated to be moved.
Jody Serrano (9 September 2022). "How Wikipedia's 'Deaditors' Sprang Into Action on Queen Elizabeth II's Page After Her Death". Gizmodo. While some on the internet were glued to Twitter or the BBC, checking for news or watching the planes en route to Balmoral Castle, one group of dedicated Wikipedia editors sprang into action updating the late queen's page in the minutes after Buckingham Palace announced the news.
Annie Rauwerda (9 September 2022). "Who the hell updated Queen Elizabeth II's Wikipedia page so quickly?". Input. Upon Queen Elizabeth II's death, the world was quick to note the free encyclopedia's up-to-the-minute coverage. "WIKIPEDIA DIDN'T WASTE ANY TIME," someone tweeted. "Someone was in there watching her last breaths with a computer on wikipedia ready to just press enter," another joked.
Jeff Parsons (9 September 2022). "How Wikipedia responded when news of the Queen's death broke". Metro (British newspaper). In the case of the Queen's death, the legion of volunteers that keep up the 'Free Encyclopedia' sprang into action to keep it updated. The first edit made to the Queen's Wikipedia page came just minutes after the first sources broke the news.
Should we include her religion in the infobox? Consensus is to include it for her father George VI and her son Charles III. Векочел (talk) 19:11, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Don't know why it's included in George VI & Charles III's infoboxes. Are they included in all the British monarch infoboxes & their predecessors, the English, Scottish, Irish & Welsh monarch infoboxes? GoodDay (talk) 19:57, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No, but perhaps it should be included for all the English and British monarchs since Henry VIII. The monarch is the head of the Church of England, which seems like an important religious role. Векочел (talk) 20:48, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
What about the Scottish, Irish & Welsh monarchs? GoodDay (talk) 20:54, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any evidence that their religious beliefs were particularly significant, but it can be added for particular monarchs if it is significant for them. Векочел (talk) 04:21, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I checked over the bios of Henry VIII through Anne, then George I through Charles III. Nearly all the English & British monarch bios mention their religion. Some most say Protestant or Anglican, while one or two say Catholic. So, I've no objections to adding Elizabeth II's religion to her infobox. Besides, the religion in mentioned in both her immediate predecessors & successors' infoboxes. GoodDay (talk) 04:32, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It should be 'Anglican' or 'Church of England' rather than Protestant. Protestant is very broad & Anglicanism isn't really Protestant it's more of its own thing being the middle-way between Catholicism & Protestantism. TheFriendlyFas2 (talk) 06:42, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's used to avoid having to list both her religions. DrKay (talk) 08:36, 4 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't include the second religion. Celia Homeford (talk) 13:51, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Formal photograph time
Is the photo currently in use taken in 1958 or 1959 (?
The photo in the article is from 1958
But the file information says the photo is from 1959
Is this an article error
I think it probably was taken in 1958 (per similarity in setting, costume and style to another shoot that was definitely in 1958) but since our source says 1959, and WP:NOTTRUTH etc... we should say 1959. Thparkth (talk) 21:36, 22 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you provide photos similar to what you are talking about? 61.216.108.177 (talk) 05:51, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Your guess may be right, but Wikipedia in other languages is written in 1959 according to the file name, and the more detailed information of the file cannot be confirmed. 2401:E180:88E0:C1D:45A2:6ED5:8519:218A (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
According to your idea, do you need to adjust or supplement information 61.216.108.177 (talk) 03:21, 25 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Thparkth that absent a reliable source that expressly says the photo is from 1958 (and there doesn't appear to be any), we should stick with the 1959 date given in the source. Alternatively, we could amend the caption to say something like, "Official photograph taken for 1959 tour", but that might be too wordy for the infobox. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done - went ahead and changed it to 1959. If anyone wants to revert, I won't argue about it. Thparkth (talk) 04:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would like.an interesting fact.to be added that the Queen was the first monarch to.die in Scotland for 480 years. JOEYTHEVIMSANTEPOET (talk) 16:33, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's already in the article. DrKay (talk) 18:31, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Death certificate full name in lead: Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor
Official birth register of England and Wales for the second quarter of 1926. "Windsor, Elizabeth A.M." is listed in the second column, about a third of the way down.Marriage certificate of Philip Mountbatten and Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor, signed by both of them, their three surviving parents, and a bunch of other relations.
I think the full name should be included in the lead. At the moment it seems strange that her surname is missing. The death certificate shows the full name to be "Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor", so this would be a reliable source. It appears in many articles: [1][2]Titus Gold (talk) 14:42, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Her surname isn’t Windsor. By convention the soverign has no surname. Although for convenience in the modern world many Royals use surnames (eg. The now Prince of Wales used Wales when in the military), these are pseudonyms for the sake of conscience and not really surnames. She is a member of the House of Windsor, but her name has never been Windsor and this should not be listed as her name, regardless of what was written on her death certificate (which I think again falls under the category of practical pseudonyms for their own filing systems) Timothy N-F (talk) 01:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We already had an RFC on whether or not to show Windsor as a surname. The result of that RFC was "NO". GoodDay (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That should say convenience, not conscience Timothy N-F (talk) 01:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, they probably only put Windsor in the surname on the certificate because it needed something to go in there as a mandatory field. I suppose if one wanted to be super technical, they could have put "of the Royal House of Windsor" but "Windsor" was probably used for convenience. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 09:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. That's why we have WP:PRIMARY. The death certicate can only be used as a source for saying her death certicate states that her surname is windsor. Nothing more. It's an interpretive misuse of the source to use it to say her surname was, in fact, Windsor. As you say, there could be all sorts of reasons why that box was filled out - probably it's just mandatory to have completed the box and the certification record simply couldn't be processed without it. DeCausa (talk) 11:09, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not only do a century of official documentation (e.g. her birth, marriage, and death certificates) and a myriad of academic publications (e.g. the biography by Robert Lacey cited in this article) name her Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor but also the family's official website explicitly says their surname is Windsor. Yet here you will commonly find an army of editors performing all sorts of mental acrobatics to dispute that. It is bewildering, yet also amusing. Surtsicna (talk) 13:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We already had an RFC on this matter, with the result being "don't use as a surname". GoodDay (talk) 18:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would be lying if I said I expected a source-based counter-argument. Those were never forthcoming in this discussion. Surtsicna (talk) 18:52, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not everybody likes it, when their argument gets rejected in an RFC. See the recently closed RFC at Queen Camilla's page. GoodDay (talk) 18:55, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Robert Lacey is a "popular historian" and talking head who when not touring daytime TV in the UK churns out pot-boilers on anything from the Saudi Royal family to Walter Raleigh. What is "amusing" is calling anything he's written an "academic publication". Birth, marriage and death certs are WP:PRIMARY and need interpretation. The royal website is about the family genrally not specifically the Queen. If you have a decent secondary source that explains the issue then I'd go with that. Do you? DeCausa (talk) 19:00, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit much to reject all those (on very flimsy grounds too) and ask for more while offering absolutely no sources proving your point and countering mine. I would have to be a gullible idiot to bother citing more at this point. Surtsicna (talk) 20:13, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Or a reasonable Wikipedia editor. I don't have a view particularly on the underlying point. If there are decent sources saying her surname is Windsor I don't have a problem with including. It's rather rich taking such a condenscending stance and then when you're challenged on rather ridiculously calling Lacey an "academic publication", producing prim ary sources and SYNTHing a website you say that you're not bothering to cite anymore sources. WP:ONUS - over to you. DeCausa (talk) 20:22, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If Lacey is problematic, we have a much bigger problem on our hands since much of this (featured) article is based on his work. WP:PRIMARY says that primary sources can be used "to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts"; reading a person's name from their birth and death certificates is as straightforward as it gets. Further, the family's website discusses the last name of the royal family, and to suggest that Elizabeth might be tacitly excluded from that group is unreasonable, especially since we see from the said primary sources that what the family website says about the family's name does apply to her too. Surtsicna (talk) 20:46, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's already been pointed out to you the problem with the certificates as a primary source. There seems no point in repeating again. i suggest you re-read. As far as Lacey is concerned, yes that is it problem. There are far better sources than Lacey who is a coffee table author. I've tried to use his book Kingdom on another article and given up because of some pretty bad errors and over-simplifictions. I have a copy of Pimlott (which is far more reliable) but couldn't find anything about attributing a surname to the monarch - which is not to say it isn't in there. I just couldn't find it. You referred to numerous "academic publications" stating her surname is Windsor. Leaving aside your faux pas about Lacey, it would be more helopful to say what these are than continue bombast and bluster. DeCausa (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
We already had an RFC on the matter & the result was "NO", to using Windsor as a nickname. Now please drop the stick & move on. GoodDay (talk) 06:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 9 December 2022
For her son Charles, it is noted in the infobox that he is head of the Church of England and a member of the Church of Scotland. It appears the Queen worshipped in much the same way as King Charles. Векочел (talk) 19:07, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
No objections. GoodDay (talk) 18:47, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
.svg)
.svg){kind=small}
.svg){kind=small}
Done - went ahead and changed it to 1959. If anyone wants to revert, I won't argue about it. Thparkth (talk) 04:33, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
.jpg)
Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the 
_(cropped)_(3-to-4_aspect_ratio).jpg){kind=link}