Talk:William, Prince of Wales/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Prince of Wales?

The article states that "The following day, King Charles III bestowed the title [Prince of Wales] upon his son Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge" but no sources are cited. In Prince of Wales two sources are cited ([1] and [2]). The first speaks about the event as "will be bestowed" and can therefore not be used. The second is a live feed and doesn't seem super reliable in that sense. I am unable to find any reliable reporting that states that the title has actually been bestowed onto William. Can someone either add a reliable source, or help revert all the changes claiming that this has already happened? effeietsanders 17:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

@The C of E, SeekerOfTruth90, and Timrollpickering: given that you made these changes, perhaps you have reliable sources available? effeietsanders 17:27, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The source is a primary one, Charles III. That's reliable. -- Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:28, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Primary sources are not reliable sources for the purposes of Wikipedia. Please see WP:RS. Tad Lincoln (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Primary sources "can be both reliable and useful in certain situations", WP:RSPRIMARY. -- Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Not when you can't cite them. As an Admin, you should know better. Tad Lincoln (talk) 17:54, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Of course a TV and radio address by Charles III can be cited. -- Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:01, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, please. I have been trying to revert the changes at Prince of Wales, but I'm fighting a losing battle. Both articles need to be reverted and locked until this is sorted out and reliable sources provided, I think. Tad Lincoln (talk) 17:28, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

It was in the tv address made by his father. Articles for tomorrow's papers that we can cite will no doubt appear within the hour. Jheald (talk) 17:29, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Effeietsanders: and @Tad Lincoln: The BBC source clearly says it and having watched it live, (WP:IKNOWIT notwithstanding), I will be happy to look for further in depth sources but the BBC source is reliable enough for now. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hull Live is one of a number that has the transcript up [3] and the relevant section is "Today, I am proud to create him Prince of Wales, Tywysog Cymru, the country whose title I have been so greatly privileged to bear during so much of my life and duty." Timrollpickering (talk) 17:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

By all means stick a citation needed flag on it then. But it’s happening, reliable sources will come and there’s no need to argue for arguments sake Davethorp (talk) 17:53, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

This is nothing to do with arguing "for arguments sake". There's no reason we couldn't have waited for reliable sources to be available before making these changes. Tad Lincoln (talk) 17:56, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Why wait? It had been announced. What purpose would waiting serve exactly Davethorp (talk) 18:00, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Reuters just said it too. God bless William, the Prince of Wales. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 17:33, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

"Today, I am proud to create him Prince of Wales, Tywysog Cymru, the country whose title I have been so greatly privileged to bear during so much of my life and duty." (Source). 101090ABC (talk) 17:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The official Twitter account has been updated: https://twitter.com/kensingtonroyal. 2A02:2121:28C:3D4F:A878:61D7:C8D6:78D3 (talk) 17:36, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

King Charles III made his son Prince of Wales. Offical instagram account was changed few seconds ago. ^{Snake bgd} 17:46, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Great, those are in the past tense, so that's a helpful source indeed. Thank you. effeietsanders 18:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Some sources

• Charles III (9 September 2022), The King's Address, BBC One
• "King Charles III, the new monarch". BBC News. 9 September 2022. Retrieved 9 September 2022. Prince William and his wife Catherine are now titled Duke and Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge, and the king has conferred on them the title of Prince and Princess of Wales.
• "Queen death - latest: William and Kate are made Prince and Princess of Wales by King Charles". The Independent. 9 September 2022. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• O'Leary, Abigail (9 September 2022). "King Charles makes William and Kate the Prince and Princess of Wales". The Mirror. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• "King Charles names William and Kate the Prince and Princess of Wales". Reuters. 9 September 2022. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• Furness, Hannah; Mendick, Robert (9 September 2022). "Royal title changes: William and Kate become Prince and Princess of Wales". The Telegraph. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• "Prince William and Duchess of Cambridge created Prince and Princess of Wales". ITV News. 9 September 2022. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• Lewis, Anna (9 September 2022). "King Charles confirms Prince William and Kate Middleton will become Prince and Princess of Wales". Wales Online. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• Chantler-Hicks, Lydia (9 September 2022). "William and Kate are now Prince and Princess of Wales, announces King Charles". Evening Standard. Retrieved 9 September 2022.
• "William named the new Prince of Wales by King Charles III". BBC News. 9 September 2022. Retrieved 9 September 2022.

Redirects

Can someone please fix the redirect, the article link is broken and goes to several redirect pages before the actual article. ChefBear01 (talk) 17:14, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Which redirect? There are many. -- Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:27, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

It needs to be fixed so that the article either doesn’t redirect from any article and there is a direct link, or so that it only redirects from the Prince William, Duke of Cambridge article name only ChefBear01 (talk) 20:07, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The article redirects seem to have been fixed, this article and the Charles III article (once it has consensus) needs protecting so that move/renaming taking place as per WP:Consensus as it caused a mess.ChefBear01 (talk) 20:21, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Personal aide-de-camp

The article says that he "was" personal aide-de-camp to Queen Elizabeth. But in the lede, we still include the initials "ADC." Do we know if this usage is proper? It seems that as personal ADC to Queen Elizabeth he is no longer ADC after she dies and until and unless he is appointed personal aide-de-camp to King Charles? Absent a source, perhaps we should remove the initials from the lede? Jahaza (talk) 19:09, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

A review of Personal aide-de-camp provides examples of the ADC title surviving the death of the appointing monarch. The appointment is not "personal" in that sense. For example Prince Philip made ADC by his father-in-law in 1948 remained ADC until his death. Rutsq (talk) 21:45, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022 (6)

In titles and styles Duke of Rothesay has been repeated instead it has to be Earl of Chester 183.87.160.46 (talk) 17:50, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: Per Charles III, Duke of Rothesay is the title that will be used in Scotland; Earl of Chester title is mentioned in the article. U-Mos (talk) 06:17, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 September 2022 (7)

The Title needs to be changed to HRH The Prince of Wales

William is not divorced, so styling him in an identical fashion as Diana, Princess of Wales is incorrect.

Prince Charles was never Charles, Prince of Wales, he was titled HRH The Prince of Wales. 80.6.40.86 (talk) 21:19, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Official names and Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). DrKay (talk) 21:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

And I suppose Charles III ought to be retitled HM The King? —Tamfang (talk) 21:42, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Never? I, Charles, Prince of Wales, do become your liege man of life and limb and of earthly worship, and faith and truth I will bear unto thee, to live and die against all manner of folks. Essentially you're confusing titles and styles. We're supposed to be writing an encyclopedia, not writing wedding invitations according to royal protocol (though we do note in the article what the style is, according to these criteria). Your point about "not being divorced" is a little odd, as clearly PC was divorced (which of course had no effect on his title or style). 109.255.211.6 (talk) 08:43, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Surname

"Both Princes William and Harry used Wales as their surname for military purposes; this continues to be the case for William since his creation as Duke of Cambridge." Wrong tense, I suspect, as the source given relates to his time as a notionally 'serving' member of the RAF, which is clearly long since no longer the case. I suggest a change to "continued to be the case for William after". (Feel free, O people with accounts to make such a change; otherwise, if there's no comments either way, I'll make an edit-semi-protected request.) 109.255.211.6 (talk) 23:15, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Was he still in uniform at the time of his wedding? I remember his uncle was "Lt HRH The Duke of York". —Tamfang (talk) 00:32, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that was many promotions ago -- he was apparently quite put out that he didn't get promoted to full admiral and get to play dressup at his father's funeral. Yes, PW was a 'serving' RAF officer at the time of his wedding. But they continued to wear uniform ceremonially in their honorary military roles, while they're still "working royals". Which of course PA and H no longer are, despite they ironically being the two members to have seen active service. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 09:05, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Titles

Please don't add titles to Prince William until they have been officially announced just because Charles is now King does not automatically mean he's now Prince of Wales or Duke of Cornwall, he will in future be titled and referenced as such but until it's been officially announced he is still just Duke of Cambridge. SimonD

You are correct that the title Prince of Wales must be conferred. You are incorrect, however, that the Dukedoms of Cornwall and Rothesay do not pass automatically. They do. Charles held these Dukedoms since 1952 as the heir-apparent and son of the monarch, but wasn't created Prince of Wales until years later. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ddgently (talk • contribs) 18:19, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

He is William, Prince of Wales this is the title held by the heir apparent and should be used in article title ChefBear01 (talk) 18:46, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

No, it isn't. It is a title generally used by the heir apparent, but not automatically. So until it is conferred, he is not it. Aredbeardeddwarf (talk) 21:49, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

It's a "substantive" title, so it's not just a matter of being used, as with a courtesy title, but it'd have to be be granted in the first place. (Previously there was a big faffy "investiture" ceremony; they might do that again, but I assume all that's actually required is letters patent stating this to be a done deal.) 109.255.211.6 (talk) 23:03, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

The big faffy investiture happened when Charles was 21, several years after creation of the title; and was, I believe, the first in centuries. —Tamfang (talk) 00:36, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

For "generally used by", read "reserved for" – that is, unless I am misinformed, the king is not free to make anyone else prince of Wales or earl of Chester. —Tamfang (talk) 00:34, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The title Prince of Wales must be officially conferred. Charles said he will be Prince of Wales, but he is not yet, so to title him Prince of Wales in this article is incorrect. The news media is making the same mistake. They hear one thing and they go ape-shit over it and repeat it over and over and over again on the air with no attempt at verification whatsoever. 2601:281:D000:12C0:8C7A:A2B5:D31E:9B5C (talk) 17:07, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I have added his Scottish titles which automatically passed upon his father's succession. Panthro (talk) 22:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

The king just said that WIlliam will be prince of wales Nstrassel (talk) 17:16, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Should we add his Coat of Arms as Prince of Wales and his former? King of Arrogance2001 (talk) 17:43, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

The current revision states that he is presently known in Scotland as the Earl of Strathearn. This is, at best, grossly misleading. This has been reverted back and forth despite efforts to correct it. I think the Titles and styles section should either be removed, drastically reduced, or written solely in prose. DrKay (talk) 12:41, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The proper name for Prince William is HRH The Prince William, The Prince of Wales, dropping the hrh and Prince is the style of former holders of that title, just like his mother went from bein The Princess of Wales to Diana, Princess of Wales upon her divorce Dbainsford (talk) 15:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

The Prince of Wales

He isn't William, Prince of Wales. As a born prince of the UK, he is always entitled to Prince before his name. The title of this page should be The Prince of Wales. Styling him William, Prince of Wales is a weird masculine form of the style devised for his mother to use after her divorce. He's literally just The Prince of Wales the same way Princess Anne is simply The Princess Royal 2603:6080:2D40:606:E288:1EF5:4066:24A0 (talk) 17:57, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

His father's page was also styled Charles, Prince of Wales prior to his ascension. If it comes to that, Princess Anne's page is Anne, Princess Royal. Making the page just "the Prince of Wales" would cause unneccessary confusion between the page for the title itself and that for the current bearer. 79.67.20.177 (talk) 18:09, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm agree. There must be a margin of tolerance and common sense in the title of the pages, thinking about who will look for what and how. Sira Aspera (talk) 19:06, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

If you feel the article should be somewhere else by all means make a move request. I however concur with the other comments. There is president from how His Royal Highness King Charles III was treated prior to his ascension Davethorp (talk) 19:25, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

William has already become Prince of Wales? Informally, without the investiture as his father received the 26 july 1958? --Skyfall (talk) 21:14, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes. And this is not without precedent either. His father Charles was created Prince of Wales and Earl of Chester on 26 July 1958, though his formal investiture was not held until 1 July 1969, when he was crowned by his mother in a televised ceremony held at Caernarfon Castle.-- fdewaele, 9 September 2022, 23:44 CET.

About the critique with regards to the creation of William as PoW. The referenced article itself says that 2000 Welshmen (out of 3.2 million) signed the petition. Which conveys a somewhat different message than the "thousands" used in the referenced article's title and by and editor in this article. The article should convey this nuance. And the critique comes from members of a nationalist party which are not mainstream views. -- fdewaele, 9 September 2022, 23:31 CET.

There's about to be an edit war going on for the first line. User thinks it shoulder HRH The Prince William, Prince of Wales; instead of William, Prince of Wales. I think it should be the latter, as that's the standard beginning for all royal pages (rarely will you see the style in beginning, just the name and title if substantive eg. Anne, Princess Royal, not HRH The Princess Royal, or Princess Beatrice, not HRH Princess Beatrice.) What does everyone else think? Doxedevenexia (talk) 16:03, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

It should be the latter. Per WP:BRSG and MOS:HONORIFIC, we don't use honorifics on wikipedia. DrKay (talk) 16:07, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Name

I have been adjusting the name of Prince William to follow the rules of a person who is entitled to a princely title. Prince William is HRH Prince William, Prince of Wales, the same a his father was before ascension as shown on https://www.princeofwales.gov.uk/titles-and-heraldry. By using Name X, Prince(ess) of Wales without prince prior suggests that his is not the current Prince of Wales. Only divorced women lose the "hrh" and the "the" from their names, not children of a monarch Dbainsford (talk) 17:19, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree that William, Prince of Wales is just plain wrong and jarringly so. One minor detail you missed though: as he is now the child of a monarch, absent other titles he would be styled HRH The Prince William (i.e. with the definite article). However, that is superseded by his ducal titles, which in turn are superseded (except in Scotland) by the PoW title. He is therefore correctly referred to as just HRH The Prince of Wales or (or HRH the Duke of Rothsay in Scotland) with no use of his given name. In colloquial usage, of course, he is still also known as plain old Prince William. P M C 18:58, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Coat of Arms.

Query: Does Prince William's coat of arms automatically change to now bear a plain label of three points as heir apparent to the throne, or does this change need to be gazetted first?

I ask because I know that the coats of arms of the Royals are special, and not subject to the normal rules. 79.79.96.116 (talk) 18:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Just as he is automatically Duke of Cornwall, he automatically acquires the Arms of the Duke of Cornwall (just as his father gets the Royal Arms undifferenced.) He also now has a plain label as heir apparent. 2601:646:8D00:4AC0:8121:FF2:462A:DA78 (talk) 00:35, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

No, this is not true. The arms of the previous Prince of Wales, now Charles III, were set by royal warrant. The children and royal grandchildren of the Sovereign do not have any automatic right of succession to any differenced form of the royal arms. The arms as they are are not connected to any title or position but rather assigned particularly and explicit to the person of the heir apparent — but not automatically. Until it is made know otherwise, the present Prince of Wales’ arms are exactly the same as they were before his late grandmother’s death except for the coronet. The coronet itself for is separately governed by another royal warrant and may change automatically. Charles 21:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Duke of Cornwall

I'm assuming, when the Queen Elizabeth II passes. We'll be changing this article titles to either Prince William, Duke of Cornwall or Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge. He doesn't become Prince of Wales, until the monarch bestows that title on him. GoodDay (talk) 16:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

yes, officially he became Duke of Cornwall the moment the Queen died and Charles became King, and this title has precedence over Cambridge so it does need to be changed Bodrugan (talk) 17:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

They have announced that William is now officially referred to as Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge, it's been on the TV news Bodrugan (talk) 18:15, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Isn't he now prince of Wales? cookie monster 755 17:50, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

no, Prince of Wales is a title given by the monarch and is a new creation each time. The Duchy of Cornwall is a constitutional anomaly, it's existed since 1337 and still exists even when there is no Duke. It automatically transfers as soon as someone becomes the heir apparent (who is also the son) of the monarch. Bodrugan (talk) 17:55, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

Not automatically. There's no Prince of Wales at the moment as the title has merged with the crown, but Charles will presumably create William as Prince of Wales in the next couple of years. Charles became Prince of Wales in 1958, six years after his mother became Queen. NekoFever (talk) 17:58, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

I should note that the title Duke of Rothesay acts in the same way as the dukedom of Cornwall. This dukedom is senior to Cambridge, so it would make more sense to refer to him as Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and Rothesay. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 20:17, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

It would, but we don't have a basis for that usage in Wikipedia practice. The hierarchy is very much What the Papers Say > legal/heraldic/formal/official names > anything that actually makes sense. I'm guessing there will be a followup announcement about his distinct style in Scotland and indeed in Northern Ireland, and maybe they'll end up with something more logical and less clumsy. After workshopping every other possibility. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 20:56, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

A reference has been added, and Rothesay added, although not in the title yet. Gealstrix (talk) 10:03, 9 September 2022 (UTC)

Looking at his styles/titles section 'now'. He apparently stopped being "Duke of Cambridge" on September 9, 2022. Also, he was apparently "Duke of Cornwall" for only about 24 hrs Sep 8–9, 2022. GoodDay (talk) 09:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

William Prince of Wales

Does William Prince of Wales still hold the title of Dukedoms of Cornwall and Cambridge Otters2023 (talk) 14:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

See the several discussions just prior to your question. --Jayron32 16:38, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Titles and names

As the eldest son of the monarch, he automatically became in England the Duke of Cornwall and in Scotland the Duke of Rothesay, Earl of Carrick, Baron of Renfrew, Lord of the Isles, and Prince and Great Steward of Scotland upon the accession of the King. Upon his marriage to the Princess of Wales, he was bestowed as the Duke of Cambridge, Earl of Strathearn and Baron Carrickfergus. His current name in full are His Royal Highness The Prince William, Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall, Rothesay and Cambridge, Earl of Carrick and Strathearn, Barron of Rnefrew and Carrickfergus, Lord of the Isles, Prince and Great Steward of Scotland. None of these have ended so should not have an end date on the titles box. Jrdk1 (talk) 08:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

My understanding of that section is it reflects the style and titles by which he is/was referred to in the dates expressed, not an exhaustive list of all his titles. U-Mos (talk) 08:14, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I think @U-Mos: you should check Charles III's style/titles, where it has that he was "Duke of Cornwall" from 1952 to 2022. Not 1952 to 1958. GoodDay (talk) 10:05, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

It did, because a misguided editor changed it. Head back into its edit history to see the stable version, which I have now restored. I see you have started a section at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) about this, so by all means wait and let that play out. But if you continue to edit war with no consensus for this change, you're likely to be reprimanded. I'm really not sure why you persist in saying these sections are stating something which they are not. Royals are formally known by their most senior title, and that is what these sections list. They're very clear, and entirely accurate. U-Mos (talk) 10:25, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

@DrKay: had it right. You're the one who's wrong. You edit makes it look like William is no longer Duke of Cornwall or Duke of Cambridge. GoodDay (talk) 10:31, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

This is not a matter of right and wrong. You're suggesting a change to how this information is presented. You've been WP:BOLD and changed the article, it's been objected to, so now we discuss. If you gain a consensus for the change, it can be returned to the article. U-Mos (talk) 11:11, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Why end 'any' of William's ducal titles upon his creation as Prince of Wales? When we don't do that for Charles' titles, when Charles was created Prince of Wales? GoodDay (talk) 16:49, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Correct. We should just copy how it was written in Charles' page before. He was both Prince of Wales and Duke of Cornwall until September 8. Hence, William's Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge titles should read September 8 - present. 121.58.224.237 (talk) 08:57, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Personally, I see no reason to have both the 'Styles' and the 'Titles' sections. They repeat the same information. The text section (currently called 'Titles') is much clearer in my view. DrKay (talk) 10:56, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I wouldn't say they repeat the same information. The 'styles' section is essentially about forms of address and is also a convenient place to clarify surnames etc., while the 'titles' section is about, well, titles. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I wonder if an RFC may be required on this. Because at the moment, it's entirely inconsistent with how we're handling this info, at Charles III's page. GoodDay (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd be happy for that to happen, better than us going around in circles among ourselves! A.D.Hope (talk) 19:28, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Is William still Duke of Cornwall & Cambridge?

I've noticed over at Charles III's page, that we have his tenure (in the styles/titles section) of "Duke of Cornwall" (for example) being 1952 to 2022. Should we likewise, have William's tenure as "Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge" be 2022 to present? GoodDay (talk) 17:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Contacting - @Tamfang:, @U-Mos:, @109.255.211.6:, @Wikieditor 0118:, @Jrdk1:, @121.58.224.237:, @DrKay:,@A.D.Hope:, @Julietdeltalima: & @Dbainsford:. PS - I'm considering opening up an RFC on this topic. But, would rather 'first', see what's the local consensus here, if there is any. GoodDay (talk) 17:26, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I don't think anyone has denied (or questioned) that William still holds the dukedoms; or asserted that there is ever likely to be a future occasion on which he is described as "HRH The Duke of Cornwall and/or Cambridge". My view is that, as the section in question is headed styles, it ought to show what styles are used for him when. GoodDay has another opinion. I will not repeat myself until the next time you tag me; unwatching now. —Tamfang (talk) 17:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

So Charles' Cornwall title ends in 1958, upon his creation as Prince of Wales. To be consistent. GoodDay (talk) 18:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Tamfang is exactly right, and this has been expressed to you many times. No one is disputing that William still holds those dukedoms, because that's a literal verifiable fact. U-Mos (talk) 19:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

So the mistake is at Charles' page? GoodDay (talk) 19:54, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

There are no mistakes or discrepancies at this time, so long as you stop disruptively editing these pages. U-Mos (talk) 22:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm taking a break from this for a while, while I consider opening up an RFC on this entire topic at WP:ROY. There's some confusion going on at Prince George of Wales page. GoodDay (talk) 22:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I've just looked over at Prince George's page, and that's an... intricate discussion. I agree that the situation is getting unwieldy, but there's no need for you to make this your problem fix single-handedly. I think it would be a good idea to open an RFC and just let things play out. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:37, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Agreed, I'll be opening one up, tomorrow. GoodDay (talk) 22:42, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

End dates for subsidiary titles

I think the subsidiary titles should not have and end date as they are still active titles held by The Prince of Wales. These title include the dukedoms of Cornwall and Cambridge. Dbainsford (talk) 05:47, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, he's still the Duke of Cornwall & Cambridge, even though he's been appointed Prince of Wales. GoodDay (talk) 21:44, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Disagree. The purpose of the 'styles' section is to record the forms of address Prince William has been entitled to over the years, which have changed as he's been granted new titles. There is confusion though, so I've separated the 'styles and titles' into two sections and added a line above the list of styles which reads 'William has been entitled to the following forms of address:'. Hopefully this will indicate that Prince William still holds the titles he was granted before his father's accession, he just isn't addressed using them any more. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:13, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

@A.D.Hope: See his father's section on titles, where it says Charles was "Duke of Cornwall", from 1952 to 2022. Why show Charles' ducal titles continuing 'past' proclamation as Prince of Wales? Yet not do the same for William? GoodDay (talk) 16:45, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

I would argue that the format of Charles' article is confusing, as to my knowledge he wasn't addressed as Duke of Cornwall after being made Prince of Wales. The fact 'titles and styles' are a single section on most royal pages seems to have led to the two being conflated, despite being distinct things, hence my belief that they should be separated. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

The Prince of Wales still holds the titles of Duke of Cornwall & Cambridge. cookie monster 755 01:01, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

He does, but titles and styles are not the same thing. I think it would be best to wait for the upcoming RFC before discussing this further, though. A.D.Hope (talk) 07:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Prince of Wales

Shouldn't there be a section in the table of contents for Prince William about him being Prince of Wales like there is on his father's wikipedia page? Michael May II (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I would say so, yes, there won't be much in it at the moment, but I'm sure over time it would grow quite significantly and it would be good for consistency as well, the last prince of wales had one as you say so why should the new prince of wales not have one? WiltedXXVI (talk) 21:41, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

First Line: Name

The form of Prince William's name on the first line is providing ammunition for an edit war, so I would like to form a consensus on what it should be.

My own position is that the line should begin 'William, Prince of Wales...', in accordance with Wikipedia:Naming conventions and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography. A.D.Hope (talk) 18:13, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support: This has been the agreed upon title convention for hundreds of article on royalty. Even Charles III's article read like that back when he was still Prince of Wales. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:21, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support: This is a Wikipedia issue. We should avoid creating an exception. And the repeated use of "Prince" will distract/confuse far more readers than would ever imagine the lack of an initial "Prince" has a meaning that the remainder of the opening sentence contradicts. Rutsq (talk) 18:40, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

I would agree with William, Prince of Wales sure, it may not be exactly correct, but the correct term would just be HRH The Prince of Wales, but we need to identify William exactly and if memory serves me correctly we called the now king's page Charles, Prince of Wales so it would be good for consistency as well. GSTK WiltedXXVI (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

For me, the reason I don't agree with it is by removing the princely title it would sound as if the person is no longer the title holder, just like Sarah, Duchess of York. For me as set out in the latter's patent a grandchild of a monarch prefixes a princely title to their Christian name. Dbainsford (talk) 18:22, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

That is not necessarily true: see Leonor, Princess of Asturias, Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark, Alois, Hereditary Prince of Liechtenstein, Guillaume, Hereditary Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Jacques, Hereditary Prince of Monaco, Catharina-Amalia, Princess of Orange, Haakon, Crown Prince of Norway, Victoria, Crown Princess of Sweden, etc. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:26, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

And according to the style guide we are to use his common name, his common name being Prince William Dbainsford (talk) 18:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

He only just became Prince of Wales two days ago... Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:27, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

But it is true for Prince Harry, Prince Andrew, and Edward and Princess Eugenie and Beatrice Dbainsford (talk) 18:27, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

First of all, the Princesses Eugenie and Beatrice have no noble title, so I'm not even sure what you're getting at here. Second of all, just like the articles for Princes Harry and Andrew, this article used to be titled "Prince William, Duke of Cambridge." However, since he has taken on the higher-ranking title of Prince of Wales, Wikipedia naming conventions dictate that his new name in the article be "William, Prince of Wales." Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:30, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

But the Laters patent say that he is entitled to HRH and Prince before his Christian name. Dbainsford (talk) 18:32, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

Other members of the British royal family are likewise entitled to the HRH title, but their articles do not feature said title because of the agreed-upon naming conventions. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:36, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: If the text originally read Prince William, Duke of Cambridge, then by analogy it should now read Prince William, Prince of Wales (i.e. common name, title). However, neither is correct. Someone will now doubtless refer to Wikipedia:Naming conventions and/or Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography. My thoughts on that are that if the naming conventions or MoS are wrong, then they should be changed so that they are correct, not just blindly followed. However, I really can't be arsed to launch into that pointless argument as I know from experience it will just get shouted down by people who insist on hammering the square pegs of reality and factual accuracy into the round holes of Wiipedia policy and style. If I were writing that first paragraph myself, I would write something along the lines of the following, which informatively gives his correct style/title, his actual full name, and common usage, without making-up something incorrect for the sake of adherence to an incorrect WP policy/style:

The Prince of Wales KG, KT, PC, ADC (William Arthur Philip Louis; born 21 June 1982) is a member of the British royal family and the heir apparent to the British throne. Prince William is the elder son of King Charles III by his first wife Diana, Princess of Wales.

P M C 19:28, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

MoS and other conventions exist so we do not have to have the same argument each time this common event reoccurs. The sort of nuance you think you are raising for the first time has been debated at length. The conventions are not right or wrong; they are the result of the consensus process. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with PMC using correct names of The Prince of Wales then expending Jrdk1 (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)

• Support this is the best of all the options, which is why it is indicated by MoS. GreatCaesarsGhost 14:56, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
• Support No need for this discussion. This has been agreed upon as title convention and used for a long time, and per WP:NCNT (section 3. Royals with a substantive title). Other examples: the name of the page of former Charles, Prince of Wales on 7 September 2022‎ (before he became king); Anne, Princess Royal; Leonor, Princess of Asturias; Catharina-Amalia, Princess of Orange; etc. ect. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 15:34, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

The picture of the heraldic achievement doesn't match the blazon

At the time I'm typing this, the picture of the coat of arms and the blazon of the coat of arms do not match. The blazon says "The coat of arms of the Prince of Wales, as used outside Scotland, is the royal coat of arms of the United Kingdom with the addition a three-pointed label and an inescutcheon bearing the arms of Wales". The inescutcheon for Wales just isn't there. The Coronet of The Heir Apparent that one expects to find sitting atop the inescutcheon isn't there either, but that is consistent with the blazon. Things change, and it is possible that for some reason the Prince Of Wales no longer has these things on his shield. If that's true, there should be some text that explains why William's arms as Prince Of Wales are not the same as his father's old coat of arms as Prince Of Wales. (And there's no reason they should be. Charles, when Prince Of Wales, was only the second person to bear that version of the arms, or the first person if you don't count Nazi spies. That's not an unbreakable tradition.) Also, the picture shows a great many elements marked with the white label of three points of an Heir Apparent, but the blazon mentions this mark of difference only for the shield.2600:8804:8C40:401:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 21:02, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

I think I have a guess, now, as to what happened. The arms depicted are the arms that William held for those few hours when he was Heir Apparent but not yet Prince Of Wales until his father so created him as, a few hours later. That is probably why there is no inescutcheon for Wales. But the blazon was updated after King Charles conferred the title on his son William, and the picture wasn't. Surely things like this could be handled electronically? I have noticed many pages of Wikipedia where "Her Majesty's Whatever" changed to "His Majesty's Whatever" as soon as Queen Elizabeth II died, suggesting that a central variable is stored, and that the articles are written not with the "H" and "e" and "r" of "Her" but, rather, with an instruction to display the text of the central variable. The literal "H", "e", and "r", not the link, would be typed in the name of the film "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" and in quoted language such as "Dear President Kennedy, I have informed Her Majesty". 2600:8804:8C40:401:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 21:16, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson

So far as I'm aware it's the blazon which is wrong, not the image. While it's very likely that Prince William will eventually be granted the same (or similar) elements as his father used, there's been no official confirmation that this has happened yet. Until that happens it's best to stick with the current image. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:29, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Titles (2)

William is still Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge. Hence under the titles section, it should read 8 September 2022 - present, instead of 8-9 September 2022. Please see the edits in The Princess of Wales' page. It has now been corrected. 121.58.224.237 (talk) 08:54, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Seems to me, in other articles with a “Titles and Styles” section, lower titles are shown with an ending date whenever they cease to be the style in use, even if they continue to exist. Yes, William is still Duke of Cambridge, but he's never going to be called that again. —Tamfang (talk) 17:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Uh, never say never. In 1996 no one would ever have thought anyone would be popularly styled the Duchess of Cornwall. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 22:19, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

@Tamfang:, why then do we have William's father (Charles III) as having been "Duke of Cornwall" from 1952 to 2022? GoodDay (talk) 09:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Concerning the 'succession boxes' at the bottom of the page, the title Prince of Wales, was vacant for roughly 24 hrs. Not sure if that should be noted. GoodDay (talk) 17:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

That could be a good idea. It's not a hereditary position, after all. A.D.Hope (talk) 11:14, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

If William dies today, does George not inherit all his titles? Apparently not. Frederick, Prince of Wales, died 31 March 1751 and his son was created PoW on 20 April. —Tamfang (talk) 17:20, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, if William died at this moment. George would become "Duke of Cambridge" (with its subsidiary titles) & that's it. He couldn't become "Duke of Cornwall" (as he'd be the monarch's grandson) & the monarch would (likely) eventually create him Prince of Wales. GoodDay (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

If William died, George would become the heir apparent. Wouldn't he be eligible to become Duke of Cornwall then? Keivan.f^Talk 20:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

No. He could be made Prince of Wales but only the monarch's eldest son can be Duke of Cornwall. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

RfC on Titles and Styles

I have closed this RfC as we seem to have reached some sort of agreement, but will be opening one at Manual of Style/Biography in order to gauge the consensus for applying this decision to similar pages.--A.D.Hope (talk) 18:11, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

'Titles and Styles' is a section in the articles of many royal figures, including British ones. Most include a bulleted list of titles and styles with a date range showing when the titles and styles were used. There are inconsistencies with these date ranges. For example, recent versions of this article have used:

• 8 September 2022 – present: His Royal Highness The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge

and

• 8 – 9 September: His Royal Highness The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge

I believe the root of the issue is that titles and styles are different things with incompatible dating conventions.

I would appreciate comment on how the 'Titles and Styles' section of this article should be formatted or changed. Thank you.

Note: a similar RfC has been made at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Royalty and Nobility/Archive 10#RFC: Titles & Styles by @GoodDay. I am opening this RfC on the advice given there that this is a more appropriate place to request comment. A.D.Hope (talk) 10:35, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the closest similar case, a royal duke subsequently becoming heir apparent, is with George V and this is what his article has:

• 3 June 1865 – 24 May 1892: His Royal Highness Prince George of Wales
• 24 May 1892 – 22 January 1901: His Royal Highness The Duke of York
• 22 January – 9 November 1901: His Royal Highness The Duke of Cornwall and York
• 9 November 1901 – 6 May 1910: His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales
• 6 May 1910 – 20 January 1936: His Majesty The King-Emperor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:241:300:B610:7517:234B:5B15:378A (talk) 17:53, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

The "Duke of Cornwall and York" dates should've been changed to "22 January 1901 – 6 May 1910", at the George V page. GoodDay (talk) 18:10, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Top example, is what I prefer. Charles III's section, should have his "Duke of Cornwall" dates as 1952 to 2022; not 1952 to 1958. Therefore, IMHO, we should show the dates for when they've held such titles. Not just the dates for when those titles were their most senior & publicly used. William is still Duke of Cornwall & Cambridge, even though he's now Prince of Wales. GoodDay (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

The issue is that it's unclear whether these lists are of titles or styles. Your preference would make sense for a list of titles but not a list of styles, since as a rule only one style is used by a person at any one time (Scottish styles for British royals notwithstanding).

The easiest way to resolve this would be to split all 'Titles and Styles' sections into a 'Titles' section and a 'Styles' section, which avoids all ambiguity. The currentl format of this page is a good example. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

As others have said, Style & Titles are 2 separate (though related) things. Style is the reference, tied to the highest held or courtesy title. I.e. It's how the person is referred to in official short form- such as the court circular or other media. Titles are the (usually accumulated) titles held by that person, ie Duke of "x", "y", & "z", Earl of "a", Baron of "b" & "c", etc. The subsidiary titles are still held by the person, but only referenced when locally important or when a full very formal listing is used. Gecko G (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with A.D.Hope and Gecko G.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  19:56, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

• In complicated situations, avoid misleading and over-simplistic tables. Explain the situation in prose. DrKay (talk) 21:08, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

  The situation wouldn't be complicated if 'Styles' and 'Titles' were separate sections, I feel. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:14, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

  It is split, and people are still changing it and confused. So, it hasn't helped. DrKay (talk) 21:35, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm not surprised people are still confused, as at the moment this page is just one of several which all seem to be operating different policies with regard to styles and titles.

  If we can establish a consistent standard then I'm sure the confusion will die down, and part of that standard should be to separate the sections. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:40, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

  Either separate the sections or move the content to separate pages about each individuals styles, titles. There'd be more room to make such changes, on separate pages. All we'd need is a page link from those pages to bios. GoodDay (talk) 00:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  So should the Prince of Wales's other titles (Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge) be [date] – present or [date] – [date he became PoW]? cookie monster 755 03:42, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  I look at it from this angle. He's the Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall & Duke of Cambridge, until he becomes King. Which is why I favour the usage of titles, rather then the usage of styles. GoodDay (talk) 03:53, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  How do you feel about the format used in this article, where the styles are given in a bulleted list (using [date]—[date he became PoW]) and titles are given in a prose paragraph in a different section? A.D.Hope (talk) 14:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  The way it is currently in the page (as of Sept 18), works best. GoodDay (talk) 22:05, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  I agree, though I do really think we should change

  • 8 September 2022 – present: His Royal Highness The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge

  to

  • 8 – 9 September 2022: His Royal Highness The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge

  To make clear that that section is about styles, not titles. William is explicitly called Duke of Cornwall and Duke of Cambridge in the following section, so the information is still there. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  I wouldn't, as he's still Duke of Cornwall & Duke of Cambridge. GoodDay (talk) 22:18, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  Absolutely, but he's not going to be addressed as that any more, and that's what styles are about. A.D.Hope (talk) 23:31, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  I wouldn't oppose the titles & styles section being split into two sections 'or' entirely moved to their own page, with a link to the bio. GoodDay (talk) 23:39, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm glad we agree on that. What about the styles section showing an end date for 'Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge', since that style isn't used any more? A.D.Hope (talk) 20:04, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

  If it helps with clarity, might I also suggest adding a footnote to the "Cornwall and Cambridge" line that says William continues to hold those two titles but generally isn't styled as such? (I suspect he will still be referred to as the "Duke of Cornwall" in circumstances that directly relate to the Duchy of Cornwall, as Charles was). Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:13, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm alright with that, if it's applied consistently across the pages. GoodDay (talk) 21:41, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

  Wouldn't that just lead to people then getting confused about what happened to the Earl of Strathearn bit?

  Could perhaps the whole entire thing be mollified by putting the "Title" subsection before the "Style" subsection? Of course, if so, then that should be done to ALL of the pages and thus this RFC should go back to a centralized location. Gecko G (talk) 20:09, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  Not to be disruptive, but could we not just be WP:BOLD? Is splitting a subsection into two and slightly rearranging it going to cause that much of a problem? A.D.Hope (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  This format is used on a lot of other pages too. If you change it only here, someone down the road will think they are helping to standardize and revert it back. If you instead change it everywhere without discussing it first somewhere central, that would quite likely be viewed as being disruptive. Gecko G (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  Disruptive to whom, though? It's a fairly minor change which does not involve changing any facts of the article A.D.Hope (talk) 20:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  replied on your talk page, since this part of the discussion was no longer about this page specifically. Gecko G (talk) 21:04, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  Agree on this, the current setup with overlapping styles is confusing IlkkaP (talk) 19:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

  Make sure you understand the difference between titles and styles. William's style is simply His Royal Highness; his primary title (except in Scotland) is Prince of Wales and his secondary titles include Duke of Cornwall, Duke of Cambridge and a host of lesser titles. The current split incorrectly mixes the two. Rosbif73 (talk) 16:16, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

  HRH is just a part of his style, not his full style by itself. The Prince of Wales is both part of his style AND one of his titles. His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales. Compare it to "Mr. Joe Shmoe". After the initial introduction you might refer to him as "Mr.", "Mr. Shmoe", or just "Joe" depending on various factors (are you talking about him in the third person or to him in the second person, what's your relationship with Joe, how formal is the setting, etc., etc.). Likewise, once it's established that we are talking about HRH The Prince of Wales (and from the date we know it's 'Prince William'), you may then drop one or the other in subsequent mentions to save syllables and refer to him as either just "His Royal Highness" or just "The Prince of Wales" (unless you're a family member or a very close friend in a non-public setting you would never use just "William"). At least that's how I understand it, I imagine there's lots of Brits who would know better than American me. Gecko G (talk) 20:25, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

• The current layout with both HRH Duke and HRH Prince overlapping as present styles is very confusing IlkkaP (talk) 21:25, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
• Agree with the reasoning of A.D.Hope and Gecko G. above. Aoi (青い) (talk) 22:33, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
• Remove the table. As others have said, it's unhelpful and confusing. He retains the titles but doesn't use them. That can only be explained by writing 'He retains the titles but doesn't use them'. That is not conveyed by any version of the table. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  The only table is the Table of Contents, I'm presuming you're referring to the bulleted list, in which case I disagree with outright removal unless you can somehow justify removing it from every single other person's page who has changing reference styles over time. I don't see how it's confusing, but perhaps I have a base knowledge bias in this area that keeps me from seeing what a lay reader sees - I thought the only potential problem was people not understanding that it was 2 different, but related, things and they were misreading the "and" (Reference Style and Titles). I thought with it now more clearly marked as distinct subsections that fixed the issue. Was that not the original problem? Is it instead not knowing how subsidiary titles work? If that's it we could probably work in a link for a reader to go learn about it, but it's not the job of William's page to explain that concept. If it's something else confusing then what specifically is tripping you up?

  On a side note, come to think of it, I wonder if an actual Table in the title subsection (like Charles' page used to have) might help clarify. Gecko G (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

• Why is "His Royal Highness" italicized? - Julietdeltalima (talk) 16:37, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  Because it's part of the style, I think. A.D.Hope (talk) 16:44, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  Because "His Royal Highness" is the style; "Prince of Wales", "Duke of Cambridge", etc. are the titles. Rosbif73 (talk) 19:17, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  They're also part of the style, in this context. A.D.Hope (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  I'm not sure about the italicization issue, but yes HRH is part of his reference style, which at this point in time, as I understand it, is properly and precisely "His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales." (sometimes the "His Royal Highness" bit will be abbreviated down to "HRH". I've also seen cases where the post-nominals get included, but I'm not sure how proper that is.) Notice that "William" does not appear anywhere in that (which is, I think, what @Powers: is getting at just below). Prince William is the only one referred to thusly at this moment of time. However, we can't call his wikipage that because in the past others have been called exactly that (i.e. his father had the exact same reference style before Sep 8th) so the compromise is conjunctions like "William, Prince of Wales" or "Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex" and the like, for the wikipage titles, none of which are proper reference styles, but is commonly misused by the public and even the media, so it also works for distinguishing and naming their wikipedia pages. Unfortunately people then glance at wikipedia, see that, don't read the Style section, and that results in further reinforcing people's incorrectly thinking the royals styles are like "Catherine, Princess of Wales" and such, in a reinforcing feed-back-loop, but that's a topic for discussion elsewhere. Gecko G (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  I didn't ask why the words were there, I asked why they're in italics rather than plain text. I'm not seeing anything in MOS:ITALIC about italicization of styles, although heaven knows I might be missing something. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

  I was more replying to the discussion between Rosbif73 & A.D. Hope. As I said, I don't know about the italicization, sorry I can't help there. Given that it appears to be standard on other pages my guess is it might be a guideline from one of the relevant wikiprojects. Hopefully someone who knows will answer. Cheers, Gecko G (talk) 22:25, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

• Call me nuts, but if this is supposed to be a list of all the titles he has held and when he held them, then "HRH Prince William of Wales" doesn't belong because that's not a title. And his Earldom and Barony titles are missing; there's no reason to state that he is still Duke of Cambridge while omitting that he is still Earl of Strathearn. No one would refer to him as "HRH The Duke of Cambridge and Cornwall" anymore outside of very specific circumstances. And the presence of "His Royal Highness" clearly marks this as a list of how he is styled, not a list of his titles. As such, the dates should identify the time period during which the Prince was properly addressed by the listed style. Powers ^T 19:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

• Comment - At least we found the 'core' of the problem. Styles & Titles should never have been combined into one section. GoodDay (talk) 16:04, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 September 2022

change 183.87.160.46 (talk) 01:43, 25 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. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Photo

About the 23 Sept 20:36 edit in the article: Hello User:JaySDEA, i think the new photo you inserted to replace the former one is no improvement. The light scene is not good, the Prince even seems to be blinded by the bright sunlight. --Himbeerbläuling (talk) 22:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

To User:Unlimitedlead: Thanks for your recent (https://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=William%2C_Prince_of_Wales&type=revision&diff=1111984776&oldid=1111953655) edit summary. I agree with your doubt. I am quite sure that there was no agreement about a photo change. Should we revert it? --Himbeerbläuling (talk) 10:32, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Himbeerbläuling. Thanks for reaching out. I rather like the current picture, but as always, I will go with what the majority agrees with. Maybe try asking other users too? Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:51, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn’t realise JaySDEA (talk) 13:18, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Himbeerbläuling that the new photo that was inserted to replace the former one is no improvement. As mentioned, the light is making him squint a lot. There was no agreement about a photo change, so I am taking the liberty of restoring the prior image. Considering that he just participated in some major public events, surely someone has taken a good photo recently that they can upload to use? At any rate, if editors would like to propose an image change, it would be nice if they could propose it here first to see if there are objections. Thanks! -- Blairall (talk) 21:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge for a day?

Considering William was made Prince of Wales at the first opportunity after his father became King, is there any need to list him as "Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge" (Cornwall having passed to him immediately upon the Queen's death) for a single day in the titles and styles section? U-Mos (talk) 06:10, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

No harm in it. —Tamfang (talk) 06:15, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

I think it's a sensible practice, albeit it does seem a little precipitous as a sequence of events. Of course, he still is a duke -- of three different places, indeed, and will maybe use those titles on occasion. Albeit unlikely to be as frequently as Chaz&Cam did, due to the wish the avoid the "Princess of Wales" title, but it's certain to arise in an "oh look, the Duke of Rothesay is visiting Rothesay, tee-hee" sort of way. 109.255.211.6 (talk) 08:36, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

The goal of Wikipedia has always been to be as accurate as possible (a continual work in progress, of course). So I would say it's better to have accurate info up for one day rather than leave inaccurate info up for that day. In most cases this kind of minutia wouldn't really "matter," but this page is one of the most visited on Wikipedia so it's especially important that it's up to date. 100.12.78.207 (talk) 13:35, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Even though he's been made Prince of Wales. He still holds all his ducal titles. GoodDay (talk) 14:31, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Yes, so that section should be edited to reflect the "present" that he is also the Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge, i.e., September 8, 2022 - present. Wikieditor0118 (talk) 04:48, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, William is still the Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge, even though he was created Prince of Wales. GoodDay (talk) 17:48, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

We show Charles being "Duke of Cornwall" from 1952 to 2022, even though he was created Prince of Wales in 1958. So why end William's titles, upon his creation as Prince of Wales? GoodDay (talk) 17:14, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

He is still the Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge. However, these dukedom titles ceased to be his senior titles once he was created Prince of Wales. In Scotland, he is known as the The Prince William, Duke of Rothesay because Scotland still holds to tradition of the Scottish Kingdom/Crown, even though it is now part of the UK. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnnorris10217 (talk • contribs) 17:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

Move the article from William, Prince of Wales to Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge

Prince of Wales title scrapped by King Charles III (Source: https://www.geo.tv/latest/443090-kate-middleton-william-asked-to-give-up-prince-princess-of-wales-titles-details) RayAdvait (talk) 11:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The source discusses the petition but does not state that the title has actually been scrapped. Rosbif73 (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Styles section is inconsistent

I think the section covering styles separate from titles is an improvement to the clarity article, but the section as written is inconsistent in what it is trying to convey. My view, and my understanding from the above discussion, is that it should track the active, primary form of address used for the subject over the course of his life. In general, this would be determined by his highest title and highest Scottish title at any given point. The inconsistency comes with the dates, in that there is an end date for "Duke of Cambridge", but not one for "Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge". If we are tracking the form of address actually in use, both are out of use in favour of "Prince of Wales". Given the interplay between the Scottish and non-Scottish titles, I'd also find it much clearer to express the styles in a table, as in this version of the article.--Trystan (talk) 04:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Yes, and Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge should be shown as the lead title only for a day (8/9 Sept.) - maybe as a footnote rather than ful text given that that it's a technicality that it was a lead title. It's often said that the title "Duke of Cornwall" is continued to be used in Cornwall rather like, supposedly, Rothesay in Scotland. Not sure if that's the case, I doubt it. DeCausa (talk) 07:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

Grandson

The Prince of Wales is not Queen Elizabeth’s eldest grandson 148.103.91.33 (talk) 13:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

correct, thanks. DeCausa (talk) 13:36, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 October 2022

Change William to Prince William This should be in line to how Prince Harry was titled in his wiki. Also, Prince William is the HEIR APPARENT. It is but right to address him properly. 130.105.160.62 (talk) 04:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: The style guide explains that for all but the first mention it is equally correct to use "Prince William" or just plain "William", and it would be unwieldy to repeat the "Prince" on every single mention. Rosbif73 (talk) 12:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Earl of Chester

Charles' speech did not mention making him Earl of Chester. He referenced William having automatically inherited the Duke of Cornwall and "the Scotish Titles" (ie Rothesay, Carrick, & etc.), and declared him to now be Prince of Wales, but made no mention of Chester. Was this an oversight? Is it automatically re-created alongside Prince of Wales? or have the 2 now been separated? I've been checking the online version of the Gazette to see how it's actually recorded but still no mention there. Gecko G (talk) 19:15, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

The two titles have been created concurrently for centuries, but if we've not got an explicit source on William being granted the title then it's best to remove it from the article for now. We can always reinstate it when things are clarified, in the Gazette or elsewhere. A.D.Hope (talk) 21:42, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

It's been three days with no further comments from anyone, and still nothing in the Gazette, so I've removed the references. They can be added back in if sources support it in the future. Gecko G (talk) 23:42, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

You'll have to make adjustment to the intro at the Earl of Chester page, then. GoodDay (talk) 00:29, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

How so? I've already added a 'citation needed' to the present holder entry in the infobox. Gecko G (talk) 00:43, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

I've made slight changes at that page's intro, to include the British throne. The line, "From the 14th century, it has been given only in conjunction with that of Prince of Wales". may need tweaking. GoodDay (talk) 00:50, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Hmm... I don't think there's a problem with the "conjunction" sentence. I don't think that "A" is only given in conjunction with "B" is the same as "B always includes "A", but then my English grammar ain't always the best... :p Gecko G (talk) 00:58, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

There's a source in the Cheshire press which seems to be about the only coverage but then general speeches do not stop to list every single component of a package of titles and outside the area namechecked the lesser titles generally don't get much notice at all. Timrollpickering (talk) 12:56, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

That was the only source I could likewise find before I originally posted. Of course it also proclaims, incorrectly, in the lead that the title is automatic to the heir (like Duke of Cornwall or Earl of Carrick) and not that it needs to granted (like Prince of Wales). I'm hoping that something will be officially Gazetted Monday or Tuesday (after the end of the families official mourning period). Gecko G (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Ok, were are now (Oct 11^th) getting to see the first Letter Patent about titles under Charles III, and it's for a title that was announced nearly a month after William's title was announced. (Oct. 7 vs Sept. 9). Why is William's LP still not gazetted? - am I misunderstanding something? Gecko G (talk) 20:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

I have yet to see any notice in the London, Edinburgh, or Belfast Gazettes referring to any Letters Patent being passed under the Great Seal creating William as Prince of Wales either. This would be odd, as I've found that at least since the reign of George I, Princes of Wales have been created through letters patent that were later gazetted.

It's also possible that Charles III may simply have wanted to create his son Prince of Wales through a simple witnessed verbal declaration that finds its confirmation in subsequent written documents, as apparently was done in the past (see, J.L. McIntosh's work on this here: From Heads of Household to Heads of State: APPENDIX C: Creating and Investing a Prince of Wales).

If so, the creation of William as Prince of Wales was through a verbal declaration made on 9 September 2022 (that is, during the King's first speech to the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth), and it was definitely witnessed (since it was broadcast around the world from Buckingham Palace). After the king's speech, we see William being referred to as Prince of Wales in official written documents. For example, he's referred to as "HRH The Prince of Wales" in the London Gazette issue detailing the Accession Council (see here), and he's referred to as Prince of Wales since 9 September 2022 in issues of the Court Circular (found here).

So perhaps we may never see the creation gazetted (that is, as done through letters patent). Then again, for all we know, the letters patent were in fact issued on 9 September, and the London Gazette may simply be late publishing the notice. Wikiman86 (talk) 21:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Becoming "Prince of Wales" is not an issue. While it being "gazetted" may be a point of technical interest to "royals" buffs it's irrelevant to WP. It's been indisputably covered by WP:RS so that's it from our point of view. "Earl of Chester" is different. Most of the Reach plc local publications seem to have uniquely reported that William became Earl of Chester at the Queen's death in the same way as he became Duke of Cornwall, for example:[4] and multiple others from the "....Live" stable" including CheshireLive referenced earlier in this thread. They may be copycat and not be RS for this and I can't find any other RS reports to that effect. DeCausa (talk) 22:41, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, we'll have to wait and see about the "Earl of Chester" title. This site here has statements from the Lord Lieutenant of Cheshire and the High Sheriff of Cheshire, both of whom assume that the new Prince of Wales is now also the new Earl of Chester. Then again, even though they may be Lord Lieutenant and High Sheriff, respectively, a more reliable source could be the London Gazette or the Court Circular (the official record of royal engagements, which in the past referred to the previous Prince of Wales (now Charles III) as the Earl of Chester, whenever he had a royal engagement in Chester or Cheshire). If William undertakes a royal engagement in Cheshire in the future, perhaps he'll be referred to by both titles, but then we'll have to wait and see. Wikiman86 (talk) 23:03, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

Those WP:PRIMARY sources may be ok if very clear, but what we need from a WP point of is a WP:RS secondary source. DeCausa (talk) 23:17, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

What exactly would be a WP:RS in this case? This article from September 16, 2022 for example, gives a statement from the High Sheriff of Cheshire Jeannie France-Hayhurst, part of which says: "There is a new Prince of Wales in Prince William, who is also the new Earl of Chester, and a new Princess Catherine, who will become the Countess of Chester." Also, the same site says in part from the Lord Lieutenant of Cheshire, Alexis (Lady) Redmond: "Those changes include the new Earl and Countess of Chester. The new Prince of Wales, and next heir to the throne, William. The Earldom of Chester was one of the most powerful earldoms in medieval England. We send both condolences, and our very best wishes, to the new Earl and Countess." Could this suffice, or would Wikipedia be interested in something difference for a reliable secondary source? Wikiman86 (talk) 12:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

We always prefer secondary sources, don't we. Decent media is fine: BBC, broadsheets etc DeCausa (talk) 13:45, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

My lord that site has a lot of cookies which I had to disable to view, and then it almost immediately crashed my browser, so I can't confirm that's what it actually says, but I'll take your word for it.

Going off the portion you quoted here: The High Sheriff is saying that he [William] is (i.e. now) but that she [Catherine] will be (as in the future)? That seems incorrect. Likewise, for the quote from the Lord Lt, does it say when "those changes" are/were/will be made? (i.e. past, present, or upcoming?).

On the side issue, I've never understood the whole bias against primary sources, but it is apparently a well-established Wikipedia policy. Gecko G (talk) 19:58, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

So, have we reached an agreement, that Prince William is the Earl of Chester? GoodDay (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Need someone who can access that source to A) determine if it is a RS & b) answer the above questions about timing. Gecko G (talk) 19:49, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

I have done some research on both the London Gazzett and Google and only found one source in a news article for a paper based in Cheshire calling him the Earl of Cheshire and it does seem unreliable. I understand that usually PoW and EoC are given at the same time but without any credible proof that it has been bestowed on Prince William it would be improper to change it. Dbainsford (talk) 22:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 January 2023

Under the “Public life” section, in the paragraph beginning with reference to William and Catherine’s visit to Japan, the visit to Bhutan and India is mentioned twice, the second with no further info. I’d suggest removing the second mention, quotes below.

In April 2016, William and his wife undertook a tour to India and Bhutan.[164] Activities included visiting children's charities such as Childline India, as well as a visit to Lingkana Palace.[165][166] Later that month, the couple met again with the Obamas at Kensington Palace.[167] In April 2016, William and Catherine toured to India and Bhutan.[164] 163.47.238.26 (talk) 03:16, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect title and form of address.

As he is now the son of the Monarch his correct title is HRH The Prince William, Prince of Wales and not just "William, Prince of Wales". 82.30.177.12 (talk) 15:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

That styles is used for sons of a monarch other than the PoW 101090ABC (talk) 22:48, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

That may be what Wikipedia says but all children of the Monarch are accorded Princely titles affixed to their forename and the style of HRH. As such HRH The Prince William, Prince of Wales is the correct name and form of address for the heir apparent of the British Throne. Harry, Anne, Andrew and Edward are all accorded the same. Dbainsford (talk) 13:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Please provide a reliable source for your claim. Sources such as the royal family's own website use on the the form "[HRH] The Prince of Wales". 101090ABC (talk) 14:49, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Any use of a title after a person's Christian name, with the prefix "The" is an indication of divorce. Diana and Fergie both lost their HRH status and the "The" status of their titles in their high profile divorces. As a born prince of the UK, William is always entitled to an HRH before his name, and he is THE whatever his highest title is. William, Prince of Wales, is an absurd misnomer that implies he is divorced from another man who is the actual Prince of Wales. He is always HRH The Prince of Wales and if you want to include his Christian name to avoid confusion, he his HRH Prince William, The Prince of Wales. Similary, Catherine is The Princess of Wales, not Catherine, Princess of Wales. She is not divorced so her title when her Christian name is necessary is Catherine, HRH The Princess of Wales. In the event that she divorces William, she will lose the "the" and her HRH status and then become Catherine, Princess of Wales. If you need any more proof that the article is important, you might note that the late Queen bestowed the difference on her husband during their marriage, elevating him from Prince Philip to The Prince Philip. 2603:6080:2D40:606:8989:E4FF:D9DB:31F8 (talk) 07:01, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

• without the prefix "The"

2603:6080:2D40:606:8989:E4FF:D9DB:31F8 (talk) 07:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I beg of you to find any instance of the royal families website referring to William as William, Prince of Wales. That isn't a title that is in their vocabulary. 2603:6080:2D40:606:8989:E4FF:D9DB:31F8 (talk) 07:06, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

They're correct and I was wrong. On becoming the child of the monarch, his correct title went from HRH Prince William to HRH The Prince William, followed by his highest territorial title. Again, easiest to just call him The Prince of Wales. But as he isn't divorced from a man, and has been British royalty since birth, William, Prince of Wales, is decidedly not his title 2603:6080:2D40:606:8989:E4FF:D9DB:31F8 (talk) 07:08, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

This person is correct. Wikipedia is wrong. William is not a commoner who is currently divorced from a current or former prince of wales, which is what his wikipedia title suggests. 2603:6080:2D40:606:8989:E4FF:D9DB:31F8 (talk) 07:35, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

If you're referring to the article title, it is in line with WP:NCROY § Royals with a substantive title. If you disagree with this convention, take it up on WT:NCROY. Rosbif73 (talk) 13:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

I disagree and feel as though the claim is a misrepresentation of why he’s referred to as just “William;” Indeed HRH is “The Prince William,” but not only are articles left out of article titles, but “Prince William, Prince of Wales” is in my view too redundant and not at an official way of reference. He is simply The Prince of Wales, but for the purposes of an encyclopedia of this range and scope, a name must be used to avoid ambiguity and ultimately focus on the individual. “Prince William, Prince of Wales” is unnecessarily redundant; the rationale behind “people will think HRH was divorced in ’William, Prince of Wales,’” is an incredibly absurd claim. “William, Prince of Wales” is not his official title as “Meghan, Duchess of Sussex,” and even “Anne, Princess Royal,” who by your logic would be called “The Princess Anne, The Princess Royal.” It is all needlessly non-concise and based on flawed rationale. “Prince [Name]” is in the articles of those of Harry, Andrew, Edward, etc is because they are royal dukes, unlike the title of Prince of Wales, so it wouldn’t be redundant. Prince of Wales is not a courtesy title as is Princess of Wales, so the whole divorce notion is unnecessary here.

It is best to avoid fluff. I see no concern for misunderstanding here. AKTC3 (talk) 02:54, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Princes William and Harry circumcised

Page Six, 6 January 2023 [5]: In his explosive new memoir “Spare,” Prince Harry detailed losing his virginity in a “quick” romp with an “older woman.” (…) Elsewhere in his tome, Harry speaks candidly about his penis and even shuts down longstanding rumors that he and his brother Prince William were uncircumcised. “My penis was a matter of public record, and indeed some public curiosity,” Harry writes. “The press had written about it extensively. There were countless stories in books, and papers (even The New York Times) about Willy and me not being circumcised.” He adds, “Mummy had forbidden it, they all said, and while it’s absolutely true that the chance of getting penile frostbite is much greater if you’re not circumcised, all the stories were false. I was snipped as a baby.

Even if this was true, it doesn't seem notable to me if they were circumcised or not. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 18:12, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't see the importance of this information. Seems like a non issue for me. Dbainsford (talk) 16:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

reorganization

Does anyone else think it/or not think it prudent to reorganize this article slightly to be more in line with other royals' biographies, specifically in

- The replacement of "Public life" into "Duke of Cambridge" and "Prince of Wales" subsections, to break up readability. - Breaking up the "Personal life" section into Marriage and family / Wealth and residences section, and assimilating the information on his health into the rest of the page by chronology.

These are slightly major changes, so I wanted to see if anyone had any discourse first.@ Bettydaisies (talk) 22:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)