Jump to content

Talk:Queen Anne-Marie of Greece: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Reverted to last version by me, previous user REMOVED my comments and signed new comments by himself in place of my own
Svetlyo (talk | contribs)
136 edits
Line 2: Line 2:


==Requested move==
==Requested move==
[[Anne-Marie of Greece]] → [[Queen Anne-Marie of Greece]] - reversion to old name as Greek (seemingly) republican user went POV, acted on his feelings and changed it and the article. [[User:Cfvh|Charles]] 17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[[Anne-Marie of Greece]] → [[Queen Anne-Marie of Greece]]

:It is perhaps unfortunate that the above sentence shows at the top of this vote. This is not a vote between republicans and monarchists. The current name implies according to current Wiki naming conventions that a person named Anne-Marie either was or is the king or queen regnant of a country named Greece; this just isn't the case. The suggested name change implies according to current Wiki naming conventions that a living person named Anne-Marie was married (at the time) to a man who was the king of Greece; this is accurate. [[User:Mcferran|Noel S McFerran]] 01:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)


----
----

Revision as of 06:00, 26 March 2006

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Requested move ...}} with {{subst:Requested move ...}}.

Requested move

Anne-Marie of Greece → Queen Anne-Marie of Greece

  • Support Wikipedia seems to be pretty clear on how consorts, whether they were formerly sovereign, are treated. Charles 17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Agree with Charles's arguments. Gryffindor 10:07, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose If her husband is not a King of Greece Constantine II of Greece and the Greek Constitution doesn't support titles nobody can claim being the King, duke, Sir of a place in Greece. The article should be as it is (of Greece) and not (Queen of Greece), in agreement to her husband's article. Charles may love to see her Queen of Greeks, but Greeks have voted against that (70%) in a referendum in 1974 and have changed their constitution. I copy from the Greek constitution:
Part II Individual and Social Rights, Article 4 Citizenship and Equality, (7) Titles of nobility or distinction shall neither be conferred upon, nor recognized in Greek citizens. Stevepeterson 14:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom isn't a queen then. Charles 22:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Elizabeth can be whatever she wants in the UK as long as the United Kingdom recognises such titles. Those people are in exile and have lost their titles with a legal referendum that voted against them in a percentage of 70%. Saddam Hussein can call himself President of Iraq but that doesn't mean that his wikiarticle has to use this term. Steliosmpikakis 22:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Anne-Marie can be titled any which way she wants, outside of Greece. The fact that Greeks make a fuss about the title and don't ignore it is indicative of its existence. Titles ALWAYS exist. Recognition in certain areas is restricted, such as within Greece. Greece, however, is a tiny little part of a huge world. Charles 22:24, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weather or not titles "ALWAYS" exist is your POV and the POV of Her Royal Whateverness, the queen of Denmark. It is neither a fundamental aspect of life, the universe and everything, nor an NPOV statement. For some cultures, it can be undeniably true. But for others it is not. This may be the english language wikipedia but it is not the english culture wikipedia. Also, although it is a bit far fetched, I'd like to draw a parallel here: in the article Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom it is expressed explicitly that for example the title "Queen of Uganda" "ended" in 1963. Please note that the title "King/Queen of the Hellenes" also "ended" in a cute little plebiscite in that tiny little part of the huge world in 1974... --Michalis Famelis 00:21, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The titles do always exist. Queen of Greece is a title that does exist. The function of being such doesn't, but the title is still borne by Anne-Marie. Charles 04:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
So she can be a Queen for any other place apart from a place that has exiled her and has a constitution that doesn't support titles. Arnegjor 22:30, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You miss the point completely. This vote isn't about content but location. Alexsander's screwed up renaming suggests Anne-Marie was a reigning monarch. Under the NCs the form <name> of <country> is reserved either for reigning or deposed monarchs. Consorts are distinguished by the inclusion of their consort title, in this case Queen. Queen Anne-Marie of Greece means a living person who is or was the queen consort. Anne-Marie of Greece means she is or was the queen regnant. Are you seriously voting to keep this page at a location that implies she was the Greek monarch, rather than move it to a location which makes clear she was the Greek monarch's wife and consort??? FearÉIREANN\(caint) 01:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I must say the move makes this clearer only to people that have read and understood the naming conventions for monarchs. How many of our readers have done that? Do you really believe that an average reader thinks "Oh, it has queen in the title, so she is not a ruling monarch"? Kusma (討論) 01:47, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's just plain POV. As regards the name of the page, the question is not "Does she have a right to this title?" Rather the question is "What is she usually called in English-language works?" The content of the article explains the different viewpoints about her rights. Noel S McFerran 13:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Its not a matter of English language, as this page refers to a title that is invalid, don't confuse her biography with other Kings, like King Elvis Presley of Rock n; Roll. You clearly want to suggest that the referendum that removed her title and exiled her is invalid which is missrespect to the will of Greek people and the Greek constitution. Also searching "Queen Anne-Marie of Greece" gives 67.300 results, while "Anne-Marie of Greece" gives 262.000 you can also find many (56.200) on the most political correct "Anne-Marie Former Queen of Greece" ALEKSANDAR 13:36, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Even if we forget the issue of giving a formal title to an exiled former Queen, but just google to see what i scommonly used in English language:
Anne-Marie Former Queen of Greece: 56.200 results
Queen Anne-Marie of Greece: 67.300 results
Anne-Marie of Greece: 262.000 results
"Queen Anne-Marie of Greece" -wikipedia gives 859 results. "Anne-Marie of Greece" -wikipedia gives 869. Only 10 don't use the title of queen. Charles 18:37, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest that we move the title to Anne-Marie Former Queen of Greece, as it really expresses her current status. ALEKSANDAR 14:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't really care whether it says "Queen" or not in the page title, as long as the article makes it clear that there is no Queen of Greece. In any case and whatever the final title is, the page histories of the articles need to be merged, because the article was moved by cut and paste. Kusma (討論) 17:39, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Clearly there's no nee to move the article Jtcd 03:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC) Not a user; IP address created this illusion according to page history. Therefore, I am crossing out this vote.[reply]
The above comment appears to be by the anonymous user 84.9.57.40, editing it to make it appear as if it is a legitimate vote. I suspect it is by Aleksandar or Arnegjor, as the only contribution from IP is to here. A user could easily log out and do this. The user Jtcd is non-existant. Charles 04:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you are talking about, I don't know any Cocos or Jtcd and don't accuse people so easily. There were 70% of Greek populations are against the title, its not only me and Arnegjor, my dear Charles ALEKSANDAR 10:21, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral Support Changed my vote. Checked NC again after john k's comment (below) and stand corrected. --Mmounties (Talk) 23:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a grey area, I think. I'm not so sure WP:NC addresses this situation as neither Constantine nor Anne-Marie currently hold the position or title of King and Queen. They are alive, so they don't fall under the "Past royals" and "Past consorts" convention. On the other hand, WP:NC says to go with the last title (I presume while alive for ruling royals and before marriage for past consorts). It doesn't cover the case we have here. They used to be King and Queen, but they no longer hold the title and have, in fact, been exiled. Therefore, I think their last title is "none" and if I lean any which way on this one I'd lean towards not using the title in the page name. (nice catch there, Kusma, on the page histories) --Mmounties (Talk) 20:09, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not right. Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) clearly states: Former or deposed monarchs should be referred to by their previous monarchical title with the exception of those who are still alive and are most commonly referred to by a non-monarchial title; all former or deposed monarchs should revert to their previous monarchical title upon death; for example, Constantine II of Greece not ex-King Constantine II or Constantine Gluckberg, Edward VIII of the United Kingdom not the Prince Edward, Duke of Windsor, but Simeon Saxe-Coburg Gotha not Simeon II of Bulgaria. john k 22:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

See above. Charles 17:23, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppets

Would someone like to explain why half of the voters above have only one edit, and that's voting to oppose this item? Thanks. — Deckiller 04:14, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examples: Jtcd and Cocos. Moreover, their reasoning was flat. I'm neutral on this issue, but I want to make sure there is no cheating going on. Sockpuppetry is a severe penalty, and can result in blocks. — Deckiller 04:16, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cocos (like kokos) is also one of the disparaging names used to refer to Anne-Marie's husband, if it's of any note. Charles 04:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't worry about this. If it escalates to such a point that the oppose side wins because of the sockpuppet votes, I'd recommend pursuing actions. However, I think this discussion will scare off the sockpuppet creator, especially if these are isolated incidents. Checkuser is always an option, and may EVERYONE in this voting remember that. — Deckiller 04:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you but I was expecting someone to make a comment about the sockpuppet votes made by soem users on behalf of Charles, without even checking the argument. Is that because Charles collected also his men as Administrators, typical practise followed by Constantine during his 10 years of having teh title and the control in Greece ALEKSANDAR 10:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The people who voted for the move back to the proper name did so as it conforms to Wikipedia guidelines. All others who vote against it are in contravention to the rules. You obviously have no clue what a sockpuppet is. Charles 19:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant! Aleksandar is a comic genius. john k 22:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't immediately jump into edit wars, I do it now because you've asked for it. Furthermore, I now have to edit this site 100 times, for the validation of my vote. What's up mates? It's going to be a tough votal, innit? Cocos 10:49, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It is patently obvious that we have sockpuppets voting here. Anyone shown to be a sockpuppet will simply have their votes removed and be indefinitely blocked. And the person using the sockpuppets to fiddle the vote will be blocked from editing WP for 24 hours. FearÉIREANN\(caint) 19:48, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Move

Aleksandar moved this page contrary to the Wiki practice of voting for a controversial move. How does one go about moving it back? Charles 22:55, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, file a WP:RM and I'll get to it in five days; as there is no meta:wrong version, it should not matter where the article is until then. 'lright? —Nightstallion (?) Seen this already? 15:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
See "She is not Queen of Greece" (I totally disagree) for discussion, as Aleksandar has trouble posting things where they ought to be. Charles 18:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old talk

per Wiki convention re naming of queens consortMowens35 07:29, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The German and Dutch versions call her "of Denmark", but the English calls her "of Greece". Which is correct? - Nik42 09:32, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think the German and Dutch versions have her filed under her maiden name, as opposed to Wiki principle re queens consort. Mowens35 07:29, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

SHE is not a Queen of Greece

The same argument was about Consantine II. She is not a Queen because her husband is not a King. The point is that by calling him a 'King of Greece', or her Queen of Greece is to give him and her an official Hellenic title, and this act shows disregard for the Greek constitution. Also check [1]; you will see that there are no titles as, for instance, in some other countries (Sir, King, dukes, etc). He can be duke of a place in countries that support such titles (ex.UK, Denmark...), but he can't call him self duke of Sparta or duke of Myconos because there is no such thing as duke or King or Sir. It's not a matter of a republican moving the site, is a matter of whether she claims to have a title in a country that doesn't have titles. Stevepeterson 14:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is precedent all across Wikipedia for people who were once royal in a certain place. They keep their titles. It is not giving thme official Hellenic titles. By courtesy, they are the King and Queen of Greece. The official titles are King and Queen of the Hellenes. Read Naming conventions (names and titles)#Monarchical titles, section 7. The treatment of Constantine warrants regular consort treatment for his wife, who is almost universally known as Queen Anne-Marie of Greece. The Greek constitution is irrelevant in this case. Greece is but one country. The rest of the world seems to refer to Constantine as King and his wife as Queen. Queen Anne-Marie claims titles of the Kingdom of the Hellenes, not of the Republic of Greece. Those are two different things. Charles 18:47, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I copy here the article of Greek constitution:

Part II Individual and Social Rights

Article 4 Citizenship and Equality

(1) All Greeks are equal before the law. (2) Greek men and Greek women have equal rights and obligations. (3) Greek citizens are those who possess the qualifications specified by the law. No one shall be deprived of his citizenship save in the case of persons assuming on their own free will another citizenship or joining a service in another country which is contrary to the national interests, in accordance with the conditions and procedure laid down by the law in detail. (4) Only Greek citizens shall be eligible for public service save in those cases where exceptions are introduced by specific legislation. (5) Greek citizens shall, without discrimination, contribute towards sharing the burden of public expenditure according to their ability. (6) Every Greek able to bear arms shall be obliged to assist in the defence of the nation, as provided by law. (7) Titles of nobility or distinction shall neither be conferred upon, nor recognized in Greek citizens.

Stevepeterson 14:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The most common name is to be used. Former royals on Wikipedia are named under their titles unless they are otherwise known by another name. The Greek government can "not recognize" the title all they want. Ignoring it doesn't mean that it ceases to exist. Constantine bears it as a former head of state for life and as such, his wife is titled as Queen. Charles 18:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't matter what the Greek constitution says. The Greek Constitution doesn't get to decide how people are called. Tradition dictates that former monarchs retain their titles, and this is how Constantine and Anne-Marie are universally known throughout the world. There is no other reasonable place to put their articles. Nobody is trying to assert that Constantine is still the King of the Hellenes. He obviously is not, because Greece is now a republic. But he is still known as "King Constantine," and it would be a violation of NPOV for wikipedia to take the view of the Greek government that this is inappropriate. john k 19:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that they can't be claimed to be called Kings or Queens of a place that has exiled them with a legal referendum. Its like Saddam calls himself Saddam Hussein, President of Iraq, wikipedia doesn't have such a title and the above link leads nowhere. Also who said that they are called Kings and Queens? Officially nobody calles them like that and all articles about them call them former Kings, maybe Anne Maria or a friend of hers started this article on that name. Steliosmpikakis 22:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Royalty operates on a different basis than presidents. George W. Bush is titled as such for his article. Elected republican offices tend to not be affixed to the end of the name. Charles 22:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly and since using titles in Greek citizens is viewed as missrespect of the articles of the curent Greek constitution regarding equal rights between Greek citizens and also because those people are in exile, no title should be used supposing that they are bellow or beyond all Greek citizens. Steliosmpikakis 22:21, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How can you possibly apply Greek rules to the royal family when the same system wouldn't give them passports to allow them to pass within the country as Greeks? The say of the Greek constitution is absolutely and totally irrelvant here. It doesn't govern Wikipedia and it doesn't govern anything outside of Greece. Charles 22:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


You can surely apply Greek rules to people claiming being Kings of Greeks. Saddam and his followers can claim being president of Iraq but his title is lost after the abolition of his dictatory and the new constitution of Itaq. Those people can stick to Danish titles, but can't use Greek ones. ALEKSANDAR 23:31, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apples and oranges. This kind of thing is so tiresome. As previously explained, royal titles aren't the same as republican ones. Traditionally, former monarchs retain their titles as a means of formal address, and there's nothing the Greek constitution can do to change that. john k 23:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I keep hearing all this "tradition" talk. WHOSE tradition may I ask? The UK tradition? The Danish tradition? Certainly NOT the Greek tradition. Are we dealing with systemic bias here or what? Oh, and somehting else: A king is made a king by his people. If the people decide not to have a king, a king he is no more. Have you people ever heard of the Social contract, or are kings and queens more important than the Enlightenment? --Michalis Famelis 00:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are ridiculous. I had made a long list of abdicated or deposed monarchs who continued to be called "King X" after their abdication, but I realized there was no point in trying to make arguments with someone who thinks that it is somehow anti-enlightenment and in favor of the divine right of kings to say that the former King of Greece, who is still known as "King Constantine" should be referred to by the name by which he is best known. You make a fool of yourself when you leap to such utterly ridiculous conclusions based on so little evidence. john k 07:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, it's not a UK tradition (Edward VIII, the only notable abdicated UK monarch in recent memory, did not retain his title), but it is a general tradition that, absent some other arrangement, a former monarch still gets to retain the style of King. Since republics, as a rule, tend to not make any other arrangements for their former monarchs, such folks generally get to keep their old styles. The basic point is this: obviously, it is up to the people of a country to decide whether they want to have a king or not. But once that's done, it's up to the erstwhile king to decide what he wants to be called. And one of the options that erstwhile kings traditionally have is to retain their royal style. But I suppose all this just shows my adherence to the Basilikon Doron. john k 07:54, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that we are trapped in an article were 2-3 friends of Anne MAria and Kokos (or maybe Kokos himself with his acount in wiukipedia) are trying to style a title that they lost 30 years ago. What would had happened if the referendum was only for exiling you two then install a proper King and Queen (not a stupid Koko that destroyed the country and is responsible for a dictatory)? Would there be 2 Kings of Greece and 2 Queens of Greece? Anyway, I feel insulted, they called me Greek republican to humilate me, a no-brainer and called who ever votes against their planned move, a ridiculus. ALEKSANDAR 10:17, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You've only humiliated yourself. Charles 18:42, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I'm Constantine II, you've found me out. It's always good to accuse people who disagree with you of holding opinions they don't actually hold. It's a highly effective debating technique. john k 17:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First its Alexander accusing Charles of being Kokos, then Charles accuses Alexander of being Cocos. What's going on here? Are you trying to pull masks that don't exist? Or is it just the difference between Cocos and Kokos that matters. Greeks use "K" while latin counties prefer "C", hence the difference between "Constantine de Grecia" and "Konstantinos of Hellens". I suggest we should vote if we prefer Cocos or Kokos. Cocos 10:46, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


What abvout your "you are ridiculus" debating technique my sweet John Kenney? 87.74.70.150 21:15, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how else to refer to someone who believes that one's position on how to title an article about the former Queen of Greece gives insight into one's views on the Enlightenment. It is perhaps not the most effective debating technique, but I stand by my statement nevertheless. Michalis is ridiculous, and will continue to be ridiculous as long as he makes ridiculous statements like that. john k 19:04, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Collecting votes? This is not fair

quoting from Jtdirl's talk page, Charles is collecting votes from random people! Hi Jtdirl, could you please contribute a vote at Talk:Anne-Marie of Greece? Thanks. Charles 18:59, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Noel, could you please contribute a vote at Talk:Anne-Marie of Greece? Thanks. Charles 19:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Deb, could you check out Talk:Anne-Marie of Greece and contribute a vote? Thanks. Charles 22:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Above posted by Arnegjor, suggesting that this voting is not fair, as people who voted got the mesage just some seconds before their vote. ALEKSANDAR 13:41, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If YOU edit my comments one more time, I'm putting you up on the board the for administrators to deal with. Here is the comment that you erased. "Above posted by Arnegjor. For what reason, I do not know. Charles 00:03, 24 March 2006 (UTC)" Charles 18:40, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is absolutely nothing wrong with one editor notifying other editors that a vote is going on. As it happens, Charles and I have disagreed about the names of a number of pages for other royals. But he knows that I take an interest in such matters and that I can also make (I think) a useful contribution. Noel S McFerran 07:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but anyweay there was a real referendum about her title and 70% of Greeks voted her loss of title, its not a corrupted referendum in wikipedia that will give it back to her Arnegjor 22:35, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than destroying the continuity of a page, keep your trash at the bottom, not in the middle of the request move section. It's rude, un-Wiki and probably in violation of some rules. Notifying people of votes is common place. Sometimes they vote against how I vote. That's their choice. Charles 22:40, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are you talking about?? they voted some seconds after you invited them. Arnegjor 22:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Duh. Notifications of new messages are instant. Cease disrupting the votes. It contravenes Wiki rules. Charles 22:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
then stop blackmailing me. Since I started discovering how corrupted your votes are, you send me messages trying to scare me that you will ban me from editting (voting and protecting form your votes) wikipedia. Are you administrator? Cause if you are I'm quiting wikipedia right now. Arnegjor 23:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't sent you an email in my entire life. You have a history of disruption and infractions contrary to Wiki guidelines. Charles 23:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I never did any personal attack, you and your collected voters did calling Alexander a "Greek republican" and "no-brainer", why didn't you send a message there? You can ban me darling there's no reason in wasting my time dealing with such situations. And wikipedia is not a good source of information if it contains artticles about the Queen of Greece (while there's no such thing) and people collect random voters to prove that, in referendums trying to replace legal ones that took place 30 years ago and 10 mil people voted. Bye bye and good luck with your queens of greece and dukes of Myconos, of Macedonia and of the mountains of Crete. Arnegjor 23:19, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greek republican

It was me who moved the article and I wonder why they call me republican? I'm a Greek roaylist and very upset with Constantine II and Anne Maria for all bads they did to my country and my people and for being the reason with their decisions that Greece doesn't have a crown any more. Thousand of people were tortured and this is the reason that only 30% voted in favour of Monarchy, of which most were against the couple but in favour of the Royal system. They don't have any title so please leave the site as "of Greece" rather than Queen. ALEKSANDAR 23:12, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What is she "of Greece"? Charles 23:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Because "of Greece" is not a formal title and is compatible with her husband's article. How can she be Queen of Greece, where he husband is Constantine II of Greece? Is she so selfish that she doesn't want to share her title with her husband? Go change her husband's article before hers, cause if she was a Queen it would be because of Constantine's title. ALEKSANDAR 23:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia practice dictates: Former sovereigns and sovereigns are at "Name of Territory". Their consorts are at "Title Name of Territory". Charles 23:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This "title" part she doesn't have as teh referendum of 1973 removed it. Wikipedia should respect what those people voted for Stevepeterson 23:51, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia practice is not governed by or kneels for the Greek constitution or any related referendum. There is a practice for living sovereigns, whether current or former, and their is a practice for the wives of such sovereigns. Charles 23:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even if we forget the issue of giving a formal title to an exiled former Queen, but just google to see what i scommonly used in English language:

Anne-Marie Former Queen of Greece: 56.200 results
Queen Anne-Marie of Greece: 67.300 results
Anne-Marie of Greece: 262.000 results

I suggest that we move the title to Anne-Marie Former Queen of Greece, as it really expresses her current status. ALEKSANDAR 14:10, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even in this case, most of the results are because of the Queen Anne-Marie of Greece article that you want to revert
No, they aren't. The minus Wikipedia removes all the results from mirrors, etc. Charles 21:01, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It hasnºt done it yet and also even in her husbandºs site the link is Anne-Marie relinking to the previous site Queen Anne-Marie of Greece. Having to relink "Anne MArie" to "Queen Anne Marie of Greece" shows the need to keep the name of the site. 87.74.70.150 21:18, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Someone changed that link becuase someone else foolishly moved this page. Charles 23:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can check that nobody has changed them for many months, don't try to fool us ALEKSANDAR 03:48, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Attempt at major upgrade

I have added a significant amount of material to the article - which had very little about Anne-Marie herself. I have tried very hard to present the various viewpoints about titles in a neutral fashion. Noel S McFerran 22:47, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked it out and so far it looks pretty good. Charles 23:10, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Queen_Anne-Marie_of_Greece&oldid=45525936"