Talk:Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh/Archive 8

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Birthname

Should the line born... in the head of the article state his real birth name as per his birth certificate - Philippos? prince-philips-birth-certificate-in-greek-is-found-lying-buried-for-99-yearsKowalmistrz (talk) 09:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't see why not. Of course we have to use the two letters Ph to translate Phi. Maybe Aristotle Onassis provides a format. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I think it'll look messy right at the start like that, and it's better to keep it to the first sentence of the article body, where it is at the moment. Also, the sourcing is very poor (primary source and the Daily Mail). Most English-language sources use the English version and it could be undue to highlight a foreign language in the first sentence of the introduction. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree that those sources are not good, but I imagine it's easily located elsewhere (very probably in book form). But, um, you think e.g. Aristotle Onassis "looks messy"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I do. I find it very distracting and have difficulty making out where the actual text starts. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Acutally, its only a matter of style, how to put it. Its up to us to decide which form is better. But we must agree first that we need to correct the untrue statement that the Duke was born Philip. He was not. Or erase the name entirely to avoid this, just leaving the titles. Kowalmistrz (talk) 11:04, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm sure a proper source can be provided. Celia, the thing is he was not born Philip but Philippos. I think it is a standard here in Wiki bios that we provide original versions and/or forms/variants of the names, like in the articles of Princess Marina and, for example, George I of Great Britain and his |son. Therefore, I think we should do it. Kowalmistrz (talk) 11:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

So two separate locations: birth name in info box and opening sentence of lead (if we move it from existing first sentence in "Early life")? Martinevans123 (talk) 11:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I assume the current source is the printed version of the Danish newspaper Jydske Tidende from 18 May 1986. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:57, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

There seem to be two elements of this discussion: first is the lack of a reliable (ie not the Daily Mail) translation of the birth certificate for his given names, but surely we should be able to add his family name (Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderberg-Glücksburg) even if the given names are in doubt. JMcC (talk) 12:32, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

I took the thread to be about adding his birth name in Greek from the original Greek birth certificate. Possibly in two different locations. I don't think anyone is questioning the authenticity of the reproduced certificate. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:48, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

We can read the certificate for ourselves. The name Philippos is given there. The purported surname is not given anywhere, either on the certificate itself or in other sources, even one as bad as the Daily Mail. DrKay (talk) 13:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderberg-Glücksburg/Glücksburg/Oldenburg is not a surname. They are traditional names given to the royal house to which he belonged by birth, derived from the original possessions of the family. He had no surname until he became Philip Mountbatten. BTW, this article states he was given two names on his birth, Philippos Andreou. Kowalmistrz (talk) 08:07, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Andreou is a patronymic, designating him as the son of Andrew. Surtsicna (talk) 08:15, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

The article on Albert, Prince Consort gives his birth names (Franz Albert August Karl Emanuel) as something of an aside in the infobox. To me that seems a good way of doing things. It's worth noting that, although that article is featured, the German names were added in 2018, long after the article was featured. Thincat (talk) 09:39, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

His official and original birthname was Philippos Andreou (Philip Andrew) of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderberg-Glücksburg, Prince of Greece and Denmark. Histohob (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Some of your sources are tabloids, e.g. "The U.S. Sun, the U.S. online edition of The Sun (United Kingdom)." Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 15:30, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

...and the Express, plus I don't see of any of them saying it's his 'official' name. We don't use IMDb either. The original document can be seen in the link given in the opening comment, so we can read it for ourselves. It says 'Φiλliππoς'. There's no Andreou, and no surname. DrKay (talk) 15:31, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

IMDb: what a joke. I met him once, and I can absolutely assure you that he was not 6 feet tall! DrKay (talk) 15:35, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, his "Filmography" and "Soundtrack" sections are looking a bit thin. Was he ever on Broadway?? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:42, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Business Insider and Insider are both reliable sources and they use Philippos Andreou Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderberg-Glücksburg. Histohob (talk) 17:59, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Essentially that's the same source, isn't it? Insider actually says: "He was originally named Philippos Andreou Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg." Nothing about a "birthname"? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:21, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

"Originally named" would imply his original name i.e. his birthname or name at origins. Histohob (talk) 18:38, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

If he was originally called that, there should be old sources that give him that name. There are sources given in the article that all say his birth name was Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark. These sources are either official (royal.uk and gc.ca) or more reliable news sources than tabloids (Sky News and the Telegraph). Wikipedia does not choose between sources when they are of equal weight, but is inclined to give more weight to more reliable sources or sources that are representative of majority/mainstream/academic opinion. DrKay (talk) 19:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

As DrKay says his birth name was 'Φiλliππoς'. I'd support adding that to the opening sentence. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Since Prince Philip was born in Greece, we know for a fact his birthname was not in English and would be the Greek variation of Philip. i.e. Philippos or 'Φiλliππoς'. Histohob (talk) 23:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

And once again I remind you, he had no surname until he became a Mountbatten. Schleswig-Holstein-... is the territorial designation of his dynasty used by historians and genealogists, as the family ruled/owned this specific part of their patrimony in their origins. His princely title came with the territorial designation of Greece and Denmark because he was by birth a prince (dynast) of Greece and Denmark but it was not his "surname". Philippos was the only name he was formally given at his birth, as is evidenced in the linked birth certificate, and Andreou, IMO, is often added (but not in the document) by convention to determine he is a son of an Andrew. Just like the Russians use the names of their fathers (it's a patronym, as Surtsicna noted). As for the first two British male royal consorts, George's article opens with Prince George of Denmark and Norway, Duke of Cumberland (Danish: Jørgen...)..., while Albert comes with Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Francis Albert Augustus Charles Emmanuel...)..., i.e. his names are given in their English versions, not in German (noted in the infobox).Kowalmistrz (talk) 08:35, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree. Then George provides a good example to follow for a Royal consort. The name "Albert" is the same in German as in English? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:48, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Franz Albert August Karl Emanuel were his given names in their original form. He went by the second name, which is the same in both German and English so not the same situation as with George (Jørgen) and Philip (Philippos). I think, in the head, we should change the name in the brackets to Philippos (or Fílippos) and leave the first sentence in the Early life section with Φίλιππος. Why Philippos? Well, his namesake, Constantine II's youngest son goes by the, I'd say Westernized-Greek version of the name - Philippos, as evidenced in this very good source. Also, I found this one, it's old but from the Guardian, written by the paper's royal correspondent, Stephen Bates. Kowalmistrz (talk) 14:21, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

References

Born Prince Philip Andrew Mountbatten

Please update article to add his full given name at birth: Prince Philip Andrew Mountbatten.

What's your source? What do you mean by "name at birth" - what appears on his birth certificate? Have you read the thread "Birthname" above? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 10:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I did read the thread about the birth certificate and maybe the full name is given at the christening. The source is " https://www.familysearch.org/tree/person/details/GC9V-M9C" Also it is mentioned in his BBC Obituary REF: https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-10224525, that he wasn't allowed to give his children his last name which came as a bitter blow, to quote "The Queen's decision that the family would carry the name of Windsor, rather than his own family name of Mountbatten, was a bitter blow."

If you look a bit further up the page in the BBC obituary you linked to, you'll see that it also says "..before an engagement could be announced, the prince needed a new nationality and a family name. He renounced his Greek title, became a British citizen and took his mother's anglicised name, Mountbatten." In other words, that was not part of his name at birth, but a name he adopted as an adult. --bonadea contributions talk 11:16, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

User:THLeonard, could you please sign your posts here? Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 11:21, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I can see your point that I was wrong to say Mountbatten was a birth name but as you have noted it still is relevant to his life. THLeonard (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Mountbatten is even linked in the infobox? Martinevans123 (talk) 12:40, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Death cause

Although the Royal household have not (yet at least) given formal indication of cause of death, it could be added (if the source can be found eg to BBC) that in interview yesterday his son the Earl of Wessex said his death was 'not due to Covid' so this could be interpreted as an albeit informal confirmation. I have heard him say this on my radio this morning (may be a repeat).Cloptonson (talk) 06:32, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Absent of a confirmation of the actual cause of death (the man was nearly 100 and had a history of heart problems, so my prediction: old age) what it wasn't should not be included in the article. We don't do that in artices about other subjects either. -- fdewaele, 12 April 2021, 10:42 CET.

+1. It isn't worth including this as the most likely cause of death was plain and simple old age.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

These are exceptional times. Many people are still dying from COVID. The Earl of Wessex's statement seems relevant, although I don't see it as "informal confirmation" of anything, apart from the fact that it wasn't COVID-19. I agree with Ian: we don't have any definitive "cause of death" for Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. Not should we really expect one for someone so elderly? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Martinevans that these are exceptional times and on the relevancy of the Earl of Wessex's statement, which, given the likely PR guidance he would have had from within the royal household, shows he was at liberty to say what he said and that relevant medical opinion had ruled Covid out. I would suggest a link to the broadcast could be put in in the absence of a published cause that might be authoritative enough to supersede it. While a public statement of death cause remains outstanding, many might be tempted to speculate, Covid is a proverbial evolving beast with a potential for surprising developments. The Queen Mother did not die in the context of a pandemic so the question would not have arisen then in the minds of the public. Cloptonson (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The death certificate says that he died of "old age".[1] This is pretty bland and doesn't tell us very much.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 12:37, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Freemasonry

Should his activities in Freemasonry be added? There is a primary source here and a secondary source here. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm neutral on whether the article should discuss this matter. But on whether the Daily Express is a reliable source: absolutely not, see WP:DAILYEXPRESS. —Tom Morris (talk) 16:11, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, maybe not the best source. Although the primary source could be used to verify? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:42, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: to establish due weight, having a reliable secondary source would be better. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I quite agree. I expect one will emerge in the next few days. Along with the New Age numerology conspiracy claims about him dying aged 99, on the 9th of the month, on the 99th day of the year. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

The Brotherhood (1984) by Stephen Knight discusses Philip's apparently reluctant Freemasonry.[2] Fences&Windows 09:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

That looks like an ideal source. A very good find. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: So are you still working on it and trying to gather information? Because I also think that this is an interesting topic that could be added to the article, if backed by appropriate sources. Keivan.f^Talk 04:49, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Not with any urgency. I was unsure where that should be placed. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:57, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Martinevans123: It could go under "Milestones" if it was something that he was regularly involved with (The article about Prince Edward, Duke of Kent has a separate section on it because he's heavily involved with it). Otherwise, I think it can go somewhere under personality and image as it was more of a personal interest for him I guess. Keivan.f^Talk 01:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Here are a few recent online sources. He was initiated on December 5, 1952 into Navy Lodge No. 2612. YouTube 1 YouTube 2 Tweet 1 Tweet 2 TimothyPilgrim (talk) 14:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I've added a couple of sentences, in the "Naval and wartime service" section, because of the chronology. I'm not sure it deserves any more than that. But please expand and/or relocate if appropriate. Martinevans123 (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC) p.s. TimothyPilgrim, your second YouTube link seem to be to a BBC copyvio.

Here's a more in-depth explanation of his lodge affiliation. (Freemasonry Today) TimothyPilgrim (talk) 18:22, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2021

Please add the category Category:Burials at St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle. 2601:241:300:B610:70AD:85D:BF55:315 (talk) 03:39, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

•  Done--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 06:11, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

St George's House (Windsor Castle)

Fellow Wikipedians, The College of St George is based at St George's House in the precinct of St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle and hosts numerous meetings for people with responsibilities in the world of business, education, the Church and the third sector at the residential facility. The idea to hold dialogues to promote "wisdom" was born in 1966 when Prince Philip met with the then Dean of St George's Chapel and they set up a charitable trust for the purpose. Twice I have included this fact in the text and twice an administrator has seen fit to erase it on account of primary sources. Apparently, the Charity Commission for England and Wales is a Primary source too! I'm afraid I neither have the time nor the desire to play ping pong over this. Could someone please take over this valuable insert? Thank you, --Po Mieczu (talk) 15:36, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Legacy

Shouldn't his article contain a section, covering his legacy, like other monarchs and consorts? Peter Ormond (talk) 02:15, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Inbreeding

I'm sorry, but I've got to say it. Some might want to absolutely kill me for pointing this out. It isn't mentioned on Elizabeth or Philip's article, but it should be. It's the truth, and I don't care about things not portraying the royals in a positive light not being mentioned on the article. I'm a fact based man, and I don't care about their honour. Look at these: Royal intermarriage and Royal descendants of Queen Victoria and King Christian IX. They're both absolutely inbred! They don't deserve protection. This should be noted on the article with links to these pages, but I could only view the source. Him and his wife are heavily related to Queen Victoria and they're third cousins. 62.6.32.178 (talk) 22:10, 3 June 2021 (UTC)

You asked the same basic question at Talk:Elizabeth II#Inbreeding. Why repeat this question here? -Fnlayson (talk) 01:32, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

It's already in the article, as both text and a figure. See Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh#Marriage. DrKay (talk) 05:48, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

Yes Philip died too young. If only the royals weren't inbred, he might still be alive... Firebrace (talk) 19:01, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Distasteful and pointless discussion, a good percentage of the Middle East and Muslim world encourages and engages in "inbreeding" and I hardly see that ever brought up. Making jokes about a dead man by mocking his marriage to a distant relative is the epitome of ridiculous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.177.74.223 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 14 June 2021(UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Prince Philip as a toddler.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 03:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 July 2021

Please change Philip [[Death and funeral of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh|died]] on 9 April 2021 to [[Death and funeral of Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh|Philip died on 9 April 2021]] so that the link is more visible, and so it looks like a link to an article about his death instead of a link to the article about death per WP:EASTEREGG. 174.206.32.159 (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Seems perfectly reasonable. Although just hovering over the link reveals the target in either case. I think most readers would already know what death means. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:12, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Picture?

Should the picture used in this page be more up to date? i feel like an image from 1992 might not be an accurate representation of the duke.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.150.154.192 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

The duke is dead; this is an accurate representation of him at one point in his life, and I'm not aware of any MOS guideline that suggests that our articles about deceased people be taken from any particular point in their life. See also Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother, George VI, Edward VIII, Wallis Simpson and so on - we're looking for a high-quality image, that clearly shows the person in question as an adult, but we're not particularly looking for a picture taken towards the end of their life. Girth Summit _(blether) 13:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

That being said, looking at the image again I do find the cluttered background rather distracting - my guess is that this photo has been cropped from a larger one. I wouldn't be averse to it being replaced by a portrait taken of him on his own, which might have better composition, if such a thing exists on commons. Girth Summit _(blether) 08:30, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

I assume we're talking about the lead image here. You think the background is "cluttered"? I see only the tiny edge of a lampshade and perhaps a sofa back? This photograph is by notable royal photographer Allan Warren?? Martinevans123 (talk) 08:36, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Martinevans123, yeah, the lead image. What's that thing behind his head? It looks like a swan is about to slap in on the back of the head (and we all know what they can do to a man's arm, apparently). Girth Summit _(blether) 08:52, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Or is it the 107-year-old Lady Beryl Streeb-Greebling "who was capable of breaking a swan's wing with a blow of her nose"?? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:52, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Um, are we looking at the same picture? lol. Maybe we need a third party, and possible swan expert, here. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:58, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Martinevans123, it's probably a moot point, I can't see anything better on commons. Girth Summit _(blether) 09:17, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Well I can assure you it's not been cropped. I think you may get your comeuppance here. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:26, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

We are lucky that photographs taken by Allan Warren are free to use on Wikipedia. He is a very good portrait photographer. It's a common but false argument that infobox images should always be the most recent one. Any decent photo will do.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 17:31, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Longest in history…

In first paragraph, should be changed to “longest in recorded British history” 24.113.175.95 (talk) 17:24, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Why? It currently says: "He was the consort of the British monarch from Elizabeth's accession on 6 February 1952 until his death in 2021, making him the longest-serving royal consort in history." Martinevans123 (talk) 17:34, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Prince Philip wearing Greek costume.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:24, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 May 2022

Add the following text to the section https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Prince_Philip,_Duke_of_Edinburgh#Charities_and_patronages

He was president of the Institute of Mathematics and its Applications from 1976 - 1977

citation: https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Institute_of_Mathematics_and_its_Applications#IMA_President JBaldacci (talk) 09:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

wikipedia articles cannot be themselves used as a source, but noting that there's a source that confirms this: IMA Presidents 💜  melecie  talk - 10:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

He had over 780 presidencies and patronages. A single primary source doesn't make this one (that was for a year only) notable enough to go into the article text. DrKay (talk) 10:33, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2022

Charles is no longer Prince of Wales but rather the current King RODEBLUR (talk) 18:35, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. DrKay (talk) 18:57, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022

Under spouse it needs her death 2022 98.202.130.12 (talk) 01:40, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Per the documentation at Template:Marriage#Syntax_and_parameters, an end date should not be included if the marriage ends because of the subject's death. The Queen's death does not change the fact that the marriage already ended when Philip died. Yeeno (talk) 03:08, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The King title

This page is missing information why wasn't he given the title of the King while he became the husband of the Queen. 46.204.12.136 (talk) 15:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

This wouldn't have happened because he was a royal consort (ie married into the Royal Family). Queen Victoria wanted Prince Albert to be king consort, but was told that the rules did not allow this.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 15:14, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 September 2022

Typo for death year for the Queen. Says 2021 should be 2022 76.135.16.235 (talk) 23:32, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Every mention of 2021 I can see refers to Phillip's death, not hers Cannolis (talk) 00:25, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2022

OnlyJustARandomPerson (talk) 08:13, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Prince Phillip Died So Change The Marridge Date To (m. 1947-2021)

Per Template:Marriage/doc, we don't repeat the death date for the article subject. DrKay (talk) 08:25, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 September 2022 (2)

Prince Philip authored the foreword to "Drugs and the Performance Horse" by Thomas Tobin. Springfield, IL, Charles C Thomas, Publisher, 1981. Add the above information to the list of forewords written by Prince Philip. 2602:306:C408:200:385F:26D1:E2F9:60F4 (talk) 19:58, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. MadGuy7023 (talk) 20:07, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Shorten mention of children in the lead

Per the lead of Elizabeth II, the mention of Philip and Elizabeth's children in the lead should say "Philip had four children with Elizabeth: Charles, Anne, Andrew, and Edward." The full titles of their children are already listed in Philip's infobox. Sometimes less is more... 88.108.44.8 (talk) 22:29, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2022

Queen Elizabeth M:1947 D:2022 Cameronbourne (talk) 13:05, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Chance to M 1947 D2022 Cameronbourne (talk) 13:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

•  Not done: see threads above asking about this.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 16:27, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 September 2022 (2)

Replace the image of line of Marriage "Queen Victoria is the great-great-grandmother of Queen Elizabeth II (line of descent in red) and Prince Philip (line of descent in green)." with updated one reflecting Queen Elizabeth II's death.

Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip are both descended from Queen Victoria

Moaiandin (talk) 13:49, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Image swapped. DrKay (talk) 18:01, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Editing request regarding Our late Prince Phillip

On the 'Spouse' section, there should be a change in which it says "- 2021" 92.15.89.251 (talk) 22:57, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

No, there shouldn't. Per Template:Marriage/doc, we don't repeat the death date for the article subject. DrKay (talk) 07:02, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 February 2023

]], and Edward. In 1960, the Queen issued a British Order in Council, which declared that the Queen and Philip's descendants who do not bear royal titles or styles may use the surname Justaquery (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

the grammar is terrible please amend Justaquery (talk) 19:50, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 May 2023

In the burial section, change from:

17 April 2021 Royal Vault, St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle 19 September 2022 King George VI Memorial Chapel, St George's Chapel

To:

Initial Internment: 17 April 2021 Royal Vault, St George's Chapel, Windsor Castle Final Internment with Elizabeth II: 19 September 2022 King George VI Memorial Chapel, St George's Chapel 2603:8001:36F0:750:D0B9:B30A:84E5:A0CB (talk) 19:37, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

 Not done for now: I agree with the changes though internment is the wrong word as its meaning is in regards to POW. Callmemirela 🍁 11:17, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

"Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark and Edinburgh" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark and Edinburgh has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 8 § Prince Philippos of Greece and Denmark and Edinburgh until a consensus is reached. Estar8806 (talk) 14:03, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

References to Prince Philip

In the infobox lines "Spouse" (for his wife) and "Father" (for his children), should references to Philip be changed to "Philip Mountbatten"? Obviously his article title will remain as is (though I would support a move, I won't propose one), but on Elizabeth II's article, her mother is listed as Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon, not Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother (the title for the article) and William, Prince of Wales has his mother as Diana Spencer, not "Diana, Princess of Wales". The same is the case for Diana's listing in the spouses line of Charles III. Estar8806 (talk) 23:04, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Lede

Why was the lede changed from what it was? I believe it was @Peter Ormond that did it. Must there be a consensus or something? 2600:6C58:593F:13FE:49C4:7678:96D:6AF8 (talk) 21:47, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

New photo in infobox?

I've no image to nominate, but I wonder if an image of a younger Philip, would be more appropriate for his infobox. Elizabeth II's bio infobox, has an image of her in her early 30's. GoodDay (talk) 02:02, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 August 2023

Kate Quinn used her imagination describing the fictional naval officer named Prince Philip of Greece in her 2021 novel, The Rose Code, about Bletchley Park. 2600:8807:9107:D100:E2B6:A67F:23ED:3B2B (talk) 15:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 16:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

MOS:REPEATLINK

@Neveselbert (mobile): why do you say no, there is no reason to link when this has been previously linked. I see you evoked MOS:REPEATLINK earlier. Can you point me to the specifics? Jay 💬 20:10, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Per MOS:REPEATLINK, Generally, a link should appear only once in an article. I don't see any reason why Lord Mountbatten needs to be linked again when that article is hitherto linked twice in this article already, one to Lord Louis Mountbatten and one to Lord Mountbatten, both redirects to the same article. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:13, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the Lord Louis Mountbatten link, which I had not found earlier, as I was looking only for Lord Mountbatten. The two links are different although they lead to the same target. In MOS:REPEATLINK, "Generally" is the keyword. It does allow for first occurences in sections, and in the case under discussion, the sections the links are in are far apart any way. Jay 💬 20:24, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Personally, I think it's excessive since Lord Mountbatten is a figure most people familiar with Prince Philip would be familiar with. Regardless, I've changed the link/text to Lord Mountbatten of Burma, which is how he is named by the citation provided. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:33, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Final years living with Pemny at Sandringham.

Can somebody create a section on final years living at Sandringham with Penny? 88.97.108.45 (talk) 13:49, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Penny who? Martinevans123 (talk) 14:03, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Probably Penny Knatchbull. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 16:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

I see, thanks. Well her own article makes no mention of Sandringham, so that might be a better place to start? Some actual sources would probably help a lot. Martinevans123 (talk) 16:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Keivan.f (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Tim O'Doherty (talk · contribs) 13:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Review coming soon. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 13:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Off topic
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
@Tim O'Doherty I hope you will help me wrap up Charlotte's GA review before we proceed with this one? Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:38, 23 March 2024 (UTC) @MSincccc - There are still some things to do in Charlotte's first, namely the unreliable refs and some of the prose comments, which should be fairly quick to resolve. Don't worry: I can manage two GANs simultaneously. Cheers, Tim O'Doherty (talk) 13:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC) @Tim O'Doherty I did implement the changes in the prose and requested you to help me with the two refs as I could not find them on Google myself. Regards MSincccc (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Please keep discussions about other articles limited to their own space. Keivan.fTalk 15:37, 23 March 2024 (UTC) @Keivan.f Charlotte's article has been passed as GA. So, no worries about that now. I hope that being one of the prime authors of Philip's article I can help with the GA process. Regards MSincccc (talk) 15:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

I will note that there is a [page needed] tag in the arms section. Can this be added? Tim O'Doherty (talk) 18:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

I will look at it tomorrow. I had searched for an online version of the book before, but I have to redo it since it seems that I don't have the information on hand anymore. Keivan.f^Talk 03:53, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Can't find a copy of the book anywhere. I have asked another major contributor for their input but I'm afraid it they don't have access to it, then I might have to remove that part. It is not unsourced, but is not 'precisely' sourced either. I guess I'll just hide the text. Keivan.f^Talk 21:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)

Turns out no one has access to the book at the moment. I just hid the text in the hope that someone might be able to access it in the future. Keivan.f^Talk 03:50, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Well I had fixed a whole lot of parameters and cleaned up spaces which were unnecessarily taking up a lot of space. By the way, @Keivan.f what does Tim mean by "third cousins through Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom and second cousins once removed through King Christian IX of Denmark - this link is freakishly long: can it be more strategically placed?" as no such sentence exists in the article as per WikiBlame. That's the only prose-related comment yet to be resolved. Regards MSincccc (talk) 03:56, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Took care of it. Keivan.f^Talk 04:34, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. I enjoyed reading this; nicely written. Shortly after Philip's birth, his maternal grandfather, Lord Milford Haven - you've already detailed this above, and could be trimmed to simply "shortly after Philip's birth Lord Milford Haven" or similar.  Done Greece suffered significant losses in the war, and the Turks made substantial gains - comma needed?  Done The commanding officer of the army, General Georgios Hatzianestis, - since there's only one, you can lose the set of commas.  Done also believed to be in danger, and Alice - comma needed?  Done Philip's family settled in France, in a house in the Paris suburb - could simplify: "Philip's family settled in a house in the Paris suburb..."  Done In 1930, Philip was sent to the United Kingdom - comma again (won't point out the rest of them after this), but you've already spelled out "United Kingdom": "UK" or "Britain" would be fine (my preference is the latter).  Done Lord Louis Mountbatten - "Lord Mountbatten"?  Not done Sorry about it, but DrKay has reverted it with a suitable edit summary to support his actions. third cousins through Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom and second cousins once removed through King Christian IX of Denmark - this link is freakishly long: can it be more strategically placed?  Done I think the placement is fine, but I removed the degree of cousinship to make the sentence simpler. Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Marriage can be merged, I think. "The engagement, announced to the public on 9 July 1947,[42] attracted some controvesy; Philip had no financial standing..." reads slightly better to me, and avoids two consecutive sentences beginning with "The engagement".  Done Marion Crawford wrote, "Some of the King's advisors - comma could be a colon.  Done In Charles and Diana, I'd also say that the third and fourth paragraph could be merged without issue.  Done It was the second and third paragraphs though. There is no fourth paragraph in that section. wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle; wedding of their granddaughter Princess Eugenie and Jack Brooksbank - both of these links, I think, could be reduced down to just linking through "the wedding", and you could add links to the people mentioned too (Harry, Markle, Eugenie and Brooksbank).  Done The latter four paragraphs in Final years and retirement all begin with "In [MONTH] [YEAR]": try to vary it a bit. When addressing the Duke of Edinburgh, as with any male member of the royal family except the monarch, the rules of etiquette were to address him the first time as Your Royal Highness and after that as Sir. - is this necessary?  Removed That's me for prose. Cheers, Tim O'Doherty (talk) 18:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC) a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): A few of the ref titles aren't in sentence case (eg Prince Philip Has a Mouthful Of a Title. And, Often, His Foot -> "Prince Philip has a mouthful of a title. And, often, his foot"). Took care of it. b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): Well the EARWIG is alarmingly high at over 60% presently. @Tim O'Doherty You don't simply look at the score. Most of it is because the page was analyzed against this blog and this website (these three URLs particularly 1, 2, 3), which appear to have copied their info from Wikipedia. It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions): With Elizabeth on their 1951 tour of Canada, meeting then Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent (right) - per MOS:JOB, "prime minister". Also recommend "the then-prime minister" to avoid a false title (is (right) needed either?).  Done Her Majesty the Queen at Breakfast painted by Philip in 1957. Biographer Robert Lacey described the painting as "a tender portrayal, impressionistic in style, with brushstrokes that are charmingly soft and fuzzy". - I'd recommend "his biographer" or "the biographer".  Done Philip typically walked a few steps behind Elizabeth in public. - this photo is a bit small at the display size: what would you say about this one?  On hold Well the present image seems to be fine as it is. Source link for File:HMS Valiant-2.jpg doesn't work Here's the archived link. Added it to the file itself as well. Can't find File:Prince Philip beard.jpg at its source link either You have to click on the small gallery of images on that page. There are 44 images and it's no. 6. File:Official Opening – Agoriad Swyddogol (28900130516) (cropped).jpg - source link is broken there too. Here's the archived link for that one. File:Her Majesty the Queen at Breakfast.jpg seems fine to me.
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Apologies, time got away from me. Spotcheck tomorrow. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 19:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

Spotcheck

Forgot about this—sorry. Doing now.

• 1(a) - Y
• 21 - Y
• 41 - (found on Internet Archive) N - says 10 July: is this wrong?
  • The articles Elizabeth II and Wedding of Princess Elizabeth and Philip Mountbatten cite page 77 of Heald's 2007 book Princess Margaret: A Life Unravelled (which is incidentally cited in this page as well) and give the date as 9 July. Has the author contradicted himself?
• 61 - assume this works with the other source.
  • The London Gazette is fine. Once you open it up there's a link to a PDF. The information is given in the second column on that page.
• 81 - IA link, N can't find it
• 101 - Y
• 121 - again can't find it: is there something wrong with the editions? The one I'm using is 2004.
• 141 - Y
• 161 - Y
• 181 - Y
• 201 - Y
• 221 - Y
• 241 - Heald yes, Brandreth no.
  • Don't have access to the hardcover now, but since you have access to the archived version I do wonder whether you have the same problem verifying the info on the page Elizabeth II. Because the book is cited there too and there is overlap between the two articles. I'm trying to figure out what the issue is.

Few issues to sort out, and wondering what went wrong with Brandreth. Might just be using the wrong edition here. Happy to be corrected. Cheers—Tim O'Doherty (talk) 23:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, was the wrong version. The other works just fine. Will have a look over the full thing tomorrow. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 17:39, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

@Tim O'Doherty I did add the URL, ISBN, and page numbers as suggested by DrKay on your talk page. However, please take another look as I may have overlooked or made a mistake. Regards. MSincccc (talk) 18:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, there was an error. You should have altered it within the bibliography section. User:Neveselbert already took care of it. Keivan.f^Talk 20:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.