Talk:House of Windsor

Catholic Exclusion

The recent bill on succession now allows royals that marry Catholics to inherit the throne. This should be updated and made clear in the article (July 23, 2013). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.250.206.188 (talk) 15:39, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Members of the House of Windsor

If Peter and Zara Phillips and also Lord Frederick and Lady Gabriella are members of the House of Windsor then we should add the names of the children of Princess Margaret, The Duke of Gloucester, The Duke of Kent, Princess Alexandra and also Princess Mary. Also Peter and Zara aren't included in List of members of the House of Windsor. Keivan.f^Talk 16:04, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Does it say they are? I only see them in a family tree of the descendants of George V. DeCausa (talk) 16:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

The 1917 Proclamation creating the House of Windsor excludes "women who marry and their descendants" from being members of the House of Windsor. That is; only those (male OR female) who are descended in the male line through one of Queen Victoria's sons, in the male line, and who are British subjects are members. With the death of Alistair Arthur, 2nd Duke of Connaught in 1943; and because the male-line descendants of Leopold; Queen Victoria's youngest son, are German citizens (and are not covered by the 1917 proclamation and are thus still members of the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha), this in effect limits this membership to the male-line descendants of George V's sons. The 1952 proclamation that included Elizabeth II; her children, and the descendants of her children in the Hose of Windsor was also worded in the same manner and also excluded female-line descendants. Thus; the descendants of Princess Anne, the late Princesses Margaret and Mary are most definitely NOT members of the House of Windsor, as none of them are descended in the male line from either George V or Elizabeth II. However, Lord Frederick Windsor, the Dukes of Kent, and Gloucester, etc. ARE members if the House of Windsor; despite their distance from the throne, because they are all descended from George V in the male line. Hope that clarifies a few things :-)JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

So, I think you and other users are agree with me to remove the names of Peter and Zara. As you said the descendants of Princess Anne, Princesses Margaret and Mary are most definitely not members of the House of Windsor, so there's no need to have their name in the family tree. Keivan.f^Talk 21:06, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

As I said above, the family tree is just a tree showing some of the descendants of George V. It doesn't indicate that they are members of the House of Windsor, nor is it labeled as such. It doesn't make much sense to remove people as though they don't exist. I suggest some appropriate colour coding is a better option. DeCausa (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Granted; but the article is about the House of Windsor.JWULTRABLIZZARD (talk) 14:09, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

I agree with you JWULTRABLIZZARD. The family tree should show members of the House of Windsor. That family tree which shows the descendants of George V shouldn't be used here. Keivan.f^Talk 11:39, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

If the family tree (which should then be named differently) is only to show members of the House of Windsor surely there should be a diffeent colour coding for the husbands (and particularly the divorced) husbands. In fact if you interpret what is said strictly "women who marry and their descendants" Anne and Margaret never mind their husbands shouldn't be shown - which shows it's a nonsense to make a "family tree" on that basis. PhilomenaO'M (talk) 20:46, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Table of countries

It it me but is the table of countries in the Designation and details section hard work to understand, must be far better ways of doing the same thing then an ungainly coloured table (not a prime requirement but it doesnt really work on mobile either). MilborneOne (talk) 20:51, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Ireland

I'm not sure of how to represent Ireland in the chart. First-up, Ireland changed from the Irish Free State to simply Ireland (under a new constitution) in 1937. Second, while that new constitution made no reference to the monarchy, the monarchy continue to have an external role (e.g. receiving diplomatic letters) until 1949, when Ireland declared itself a republic (see Republic of Ireland Act).

--Tóraí (talk) 23:48, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

May be the simplest would be similar to the chart for List of Dominions[1] --Qexigator (talk) 09:37, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I think I would be inclined to leave it as it is in this article (including just listing the Free State) but with a footnote that says something along the lines of "For most purposes the monarch ceased to fulfil the role of head of state in 1936. Whether the monarch continued to be the Irish head of state from 1936 to 1949 is a subject of scholarly debate. The position was clarified in 1949 when Ireland was formally declared to be a republic." DeCausa (talk) 13:36, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure that this doesn't overstate the post-1936 role of the monarch. Looking at most sources they seem to be saying that there's not much doubt that the King wasn't head of state. Vernon Bogdanor says that the monarch was just an "organ or instrument" authorized by the Irish President (here). DeCausa (talk) 14:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

So, why not simply adopt the solution above[2] :- use the names before and after 1936 with footnote, and the neutral wording in third column: The link with the monarchy ceased with the passage of the Republic of Ireland Act 1948, which came into force on 18 April 1949 and declared that the state was a republic. Qexigator (talk) 14:50, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Because per Bogdanor and others, it wasn't a monarchy post 1936. DeCausa (talk) 15:02, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

With all respect to him and his works, a Bogdanor one-liner is not sufficient for the peculiar and anomalous events and circumstances of the period. It can be seen that the wording quoted above is factually accurate and does not assert or imply that Ireland was a monarchy? Qexigator (talk) 15:40, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

I just gave Bogdanor as a particularly clear example. (It isn't a one liner, he discusses the issue over two pages.) If you do a search of Google Books most sources clearly say that the Irish Prseident replaced the monarch as Head of State from 1936. As far as I can see, the Dominions' list gives a misleading impression which isn't accurate. DeCausa (talk) 16:03, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

King George VI remained Head of State in Ireland until 18th April 1949. (MichaelMeredith1967 (talk) 16:57, 9 December 2013 (UTC))