Jump to content

Talk:Diana, Princess of Wales

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Roehampton1234 (talk | contribs) at 15:00, 2 May 2011 (→‎Charles went first!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured article candidateDiana, Princess of Wales is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 8, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
March 27, 2005Featured article candidateNot promoted
August 8, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed
Current status: Former featured article candidate
Archive
Archives
  1. February 2003 – August 2006

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.

Question

Wasn't Diana a vegetarian? Why isn't that mentioned? In modern times, that is a relavent political statement. It is an identity. She was also responsible for unforgettable banquets such as the 17-course meatless dinner served by the British Embassy during her first visit to the United States in her honor.

To further illustrate this point, she also annoyed the Royal Family by not paricipating in hunting events. She made it clear to her wardrobe designers that fur could not be used even as decoration on her clothes.

Her stance on animal rights and her vegetarianism should at least be mentioned.

Sources: Diana is vegetarian. http://www.time.com/time/daily/special/diana/readingroom/8191/11_11.html

Pictures

With so many lovely pictures taken of these beautiful woman is this the best you can do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.77.42.65 (talk) 00:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Most photographs of Diana are protected by copyright so we cannot use them. The ones in the article are free images.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 07:34, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Poisoned?

Why does this article say that Diana's death was caused by poisoning? Was this the work of some quack conspiracy theorist? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.159.144.42 (talk) 20:06, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any mentioning of a poisoning. But please have respect for others, conspiracy theories whether "quack"ie or not, offer alternative views where the mainstream media fails, like the fall of 3 skyscrapers at freefall speed caused by 2 airplanes and abit of kerosene. An accident where the driver lives and the passengers he carries die, is pretty rare, infact statistically, the Diana accident is the only one of its kind. I hope you understand why some people cannot understand why it is just an "accident". Good luck with your quest, and yes, if you see any uncited content, please use the non-citation tag. --94.195.194.144 (talk) 05:14, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect Blazon of Arms

These arms are incorrectly or inadequately blazoned. The shield is better blazoned: "impaled with a shield quarterly 1st and 4th Argent 2nd and 3rd Gules a fret Or overall a bend Sable charged with three escallops Argent." The use of the term "defaced" implies some sort of dis-honour which it was not. The supporters should be: Dexter: a lion rampant gardant Or crowned with the coronet of the Prince of Wales Proper and gored with a label of three points; Sinister: a griffin Ermine winged Erminois languled and armed Gules and gorged with a coronet composed of crosses patée and fleurs de lis affixed thereto a chain passing between the forelegs and reflexed over the back Or.

I would edit this myself, but do not yet have the skills. Kiltpin (talk) 11:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it seems I have found some skills. I have corrected the blazon for the impaled shield. Kiltpin (talk) 21:37, 25 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

BLP violation?

Is it necessary to include the fact that she chose not to circumcise her children. I'm fairly certain we wouldn't include in someone's article that he is or isn't circumcised, so I'm not sure it's appropriate here. Hot Stop (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree - it would be pretty weird if she had chosen to circumcise them! Deb (talk) 19:11, 24 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Does this really have anything to do with BLP? You know, since there's no LP? 205.133.172.113 (talk) 00:45, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Except Wills and Harry, since WP:BLP extends that widely, and to be honest I can't see it being worthy of mention, since the reasons for circumcision vary widely across cultures, and even if reliably sourced, I don't see meaning that much. Hengist Pod (talk) 01:02, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Rearrange sections

Is it just me, or should the Tribute, funeral, and burial section be listed ahead of the Conspiracy theories and inquest section? Chronologically, it would make more sense.
Thatotherperson (talk/contribs) 10:25, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why isn't this article followingWP:COMMONNAME?

Why isn't this article following WP:COMMONNAME? The most common name for this article's topic is "Princess Diana", not "Diana, Princess of Wales" which almost no one uses. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 14:34, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Diana, Princess of Wales is the agreed upon title bestowed upon her by the British Monarchy following her divorce from Prince Charles if I remember correctly. Miyagawa (talk) 23:56, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand your point but the Common Name guidelines also state "ambiguous or inaccurate names for the article subject, as determined by reliable sources, are often avoided even though they may be more frequently used by reliable sources". The name 'Princess Diana', whilst by far the most commonly used name, is inaccurate and misleading. Diana was never given that style as she married into the Royal Family, rather than being born into it. --86.173.142.69 (talk) 19:29, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Princess Diana became that because she was married to the Prince of Wales; Middleton will become that also. Nasnema  Chat  20:40, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well no she didn't, because she was not born a princess. At no point in her life was she ever called Princess Diana (except by the press of countries outside Britain who didn't know better). Neither is the Duchess of Cambridge called Princess Catherine. It does not work like that. 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 23:30, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
To actually answer the original question, articles on royals are governed by a different naming convention. WP:COMMONNAME is superseded by topic-specific conventions when the latter exist and have been accepted by the community. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:38, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Charles went first!

I believe it is common knowledge that Charles went back to Camilla before Diana ever began a relationship with James Hewitt; in recent years it is even implied that as early as 1984-5 he had rekindled his relationship with her. This article implies that Diana began an adulterous relationship first, and that "in turn" Charles went back to Camilla; this is not the consensus in neither the official or unofficial reading available on the subject. sorry I'm new... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.132.154.239 (talk) 03:14, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you in substance and will take a look at the article to see if any wording needs to be amended. Whilst it is probably true that Diana was the first to have a sexual relationship with a third party, the kind of statements you are referring to would seem to be twisting the situation. Deb (talk) 07:47, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of Diana affairs

Why is there no mention of dianas=';s 10 affairs and that she was more of a slut then charles is?

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Diana,_Princess_of_Wales&oldid=427075884"